http://www.oyez.org/issues/interstate-relations/boundary-dispute/ U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us http://www.oyez.org/images/oyezfeed.jpg U.S. Supreme Court Audio Recordings, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) Mon, 08 Jan 1990 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 74orig_19900108-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1989/1989_74_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 18 Mar 1991 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 106orig_19910318-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1990/1990_106_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Tue, 03 Oct 1995 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 121orig_19951003-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_121_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 16 Jan 1984 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 86orig_19840116-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_86_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:00:00 -0500 <p>In 1977, a dispute between New Hampshire and Maine over lobster fishing rights resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court entering a consent judgment setting the precise location of the States' "lateral marine boundary," or the boundary in the marine waters off the coast. Utilizing a 1740 decree of King George II, the States agreed that the decree's words "Middle of the River" referred to the middle of the Piscataqua River's main navigable channel. Ultimately, the 1997 consent judgment defined "Middle of the River" as "the middle of the main channel of navigation of the Piscataqua River." The consent judgment did not fix the inland Piscataqua River boundary. In 2000, New Hampshire brought an original action against Maine, claiming that the inland river boundary runs along the Maine shore and that the entire Piscataqua River and all of Portsmouth Harbor belong to New Hampshire. In response, Maine filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the 1740 boundary determination by King George II and the 1977 consent judgment barred the complaint.</p> <p>Is New Hampshire's original suit against Maine, which disputes the Piscataqua River boundary, barred by earlier proceedings?</p> 130orig_20010416-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_130_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 19 Apr 1976 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 64orig_19760419-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_64_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 12 Jan 1998 12:00:00 -0500 <p>Under an 1834 compact between New York and New Jersey, Ellis Island was deemed part of New York. It was later determined, by the Supreme Court, that New Jersey would have sovereign rights over all submerged lands on its side of the Hudson River. During the time Ellis Island was used to receive immigrants, the Federal Government filled around the island adding some 24.5 acres to its original size over 42 years. When immigration was diverted from Ellis Island in 1954, New York and New Jersey asserted rival sovereignty claims over the Island's filled portions. New Jersey finally invoked the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to solve the matter once and for all time.</p> <p>Are the filled portions on Jersey's Side of Ellis Island under the sovereign authority of the State of New York or the State of New Jersey?</p> 120orig_19980112-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1997/1997_120_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 19 Jan 1976 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet. 36orig_19760119-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_36_orig/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist