Wasankar Nimisha, Elliott Heather, Clement T Prabhakar
Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, United States.
The University of Alabama School of Law, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, United States.
ACS ES T Water. 2024 Aug 7;4(9):3741-3749. doi: 10.1021/acsestwater.4c00289. eCollection 2024 Sep 13.
As stresses on groundwater resources increase due to growing population and climate change, water litigation, such as the recently decided Mississippi (MS) vs Tennessee (TN) lawsuit, will become more common. In the United States, lawsuits between states can be heard only by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). These lawsuits are expensive and lengthy, often requiring highly specialized technical expertise. In the MS vs TN case, the Court unanimously held that an interstate aquifer is subject to equitable apportionment. Although this appears to be a sound resolution, a careful examination of the SCOTUS hearing transcript revealed that the Justices had several egregious misconceptions about the groundwater system. These misconceptions arose in part due to the failure of technical experts to communicate groundwater concepts in understandable terms and in part due to the Justices' lack of expertise in groundwater science. To address these issues, we first explore methods for improving scientific communication in courtrooms. Second, we propose ideas for reforming the legal system and provide compelling arguments for using the lower courts to hear such cases. We also explore the possibility of creating specialized federal water courts to resolve water disputes.
随着人口增长和气候变化导致地下水资源压力增大,水事诉讼,比如最近判决的密西西比州(MS)与田纳西州(TN)的诉讼案,将会变得更加常见。在美国,州与州之间的诉讼只能由美国最高法院(SCOTUS)审理。这些诉讼成本高昂且耗时长久,通常需要高度专业化的技术专长。在密西西比州与田纳西州的案件中,法院一致裁定州际含水层应进行公平分配。尽管这似乎是一个合理的裁决,但仔细研读美国最高法院的庭审记录会发现,大法官们对地下水系统存在一些严重的误解。这些误解部分源于技术专家未能以通俗易懂的方式传达地下水概念,部分源于大法官们缺乏地下水科学专业知识。为解决这些问题,我们首先探讨改善法庭科学交流的方法。其次,我们提出法律制度改革的想法,并为利用下级法院审理此类案件提供有力论据。我们还探讨设立专门的联邦水事法院来解决水事纠纷的可能性。