| Virginia v. Maryland | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 7, 2003 Decided December 9, 2003 | |
| Full case name | Commonwealth of Virginia v. State of Maryland |
| Citations | 540 U.S. 56 (more) 124 S. Ct. 598; 157 L. Ed. 2d 1226e |
| Holding | |
| Maryland has no authority to regulate or prohibit Virginia, its political subdivisions, or Virginia's residents from enjoying Virginia's riparian rights in the Potomac River. While Maryland owns the riverbed up to the low water mark of the Virginia shore, both states enjoy equal riparian rights. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Kennedy |
| Laws applied | |
| Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 | |
Virginia v. Maryland, 540 U.S. 56 (2003), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States settled a dispute between the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland regarding Virginia's riparian rights to the Potomac River.[1] The Supreme Court held in a 7—2 decision that Maryland has no legal authority to regulate or prohibit Virginia and its political subdivisions from building and improving structures in the river and from drawing water from the river.[2] The decision drew heavily on the Maryland–Virginia Compact of 1785, an agreement between the two states concerning navigational and riparian water rights along the Potomac River.[3]