JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS

July 2008

To read this entire item of approximately 2000 words online now in PDF format: Click here to read this item if you are an existing subscriber to this publication. Click here to purchase the full text of this item to read now (price: $25). To subscribe to this publication and immediately access all its archives including this item, select the relevant publication under 'Catalogue' in the left-hand column PLEASE NOTE: to read PDFs on www.argento.com you must be using Version 5 of Acrobat Reader or Adobe Reader. If you have an earlier version you can download the latest free of charge by clicking here

State Court Declares Unconstitutional Portions of Washington’s 2003 Municipal Water Law
Lummi Indian Nation, et al. v. State of Washington, et al., and Joan Burlingame, et al. v. State of Washington, et al.

On June 11, 2008, a Superior Court in Seattle ruled that three provisions of Washington’s 2003 municipal water rights legislation violate the doctrine of separation of powers under the Washington State Constitution. Judge Jim Rogers ruled that the Washington Legislature’s enactment of definitions of “municipal water supplier” and “municipal water supply purposes,” as well as its effort to confirm the validity of certain inchoate municipal water rights, were an unconstitutional attempt to overrule a 1998 interpretation of the Water Code by the Washington Supreme Court. This ruling is widely viewed as just the first step in a case that will ultimately be decided by the Washington Supreme Court.