A New Day? Two Interpretations of the Texas Supreme Court’s Ruling in Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Day and McDaniel
Vol. 4 No. 1 (2013): Special Issue on Groundwater. Cover photo: An artesian well, belonging to catfsh farmer Ronnie Pucek, in the Edwards Aquifer in 1993. © Peter Essick.
PDF

Keywords

Texas water law
Texas groundwater law
Edwards Aquifer Authority
Day case

Abstract

Editors’ Note: Many in Texas waited patiently for the Texas Supreme Court decision on Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Day and McDaniel, arguably the most important decision on Texas groundwater law in a generation. Regardless of which way the decision went, it undoubtedly would have a big impact on the management of groundwater resources in the state. We were not disappointed. The decision is complicated and, in places, seemingly contradictory. By opening groundwater management to regulatory takings, a door to another complicated area of law has been opened. Although the Day case answers some questions, others remain unanswered. And there are strong opinions on what Day means and doesn’t mean.

While the Texas Supreme Court considered the Day case, Russ Johnson and Greg Ellis regaled audiences at multiple venues on their views on the case and what the court would or should do. Johnson’s arguments leaned toward the landowner perspective while Ellis’s arguments leaned toward the groundwater conservation district perspective. With the Day case decided, we thought it would be informative to ask Johnson and Ellis what they thought Day meant. Given the topic and nature of the contributions, only the editorial board reviewed the papers before accepting them for publication. As expected, the papers are interesting and informative—and help set the stage for the path forward.

https://doi.org/10.21423/twj.v4i1.6990
PDF

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
    2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
    3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).