Brief of the State of Texas - Original No. 10 - Brief

Sep 22, 2026

Brief submitted by the State of Texas in a U.S. Supreme Court proceeding (October Term, 1958), styled as an action between the State of Texas and multiple defendant states. The argument focuses on domestic property and jurisdictional issues limited to the seabed and subsoil beneath Texas’s historic three-league boundary. It addresses the legislative purpose and construction of the Submerged Lands Act, contemporaneous executive and congressional interpretations, and Texas’s existing three-league Gulfward boundary recognized through historical acts and treaties.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages323

Reading Time13 h 34 min

AccessFree to download

Preliminary Statement

Nature of the Rights in Controversy

Status of the Case

Summary of Argument

Argument

The question before the Court is domestic law limited to property rights in the seabed and subsoil

Texas'historic three-league boundary is the measure of the transfer made to Texas by the United States under the Act

Under the Act, Texas was granted property rights in the subsoil and seabed out to its historic three-league boundary

| | upr G UuL
F工L田D | | --- | --- | | AUG131958
J T.2Y,Cl | | IN THEupreme nurt nf the Hnite tateOCTOBER TERM,1958 No.10,Original UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintif, V. STATES OF LOUISIANA,TEXAS,MISSISSIPPI,ALABAMA and FLORIDA, Defendants. 一 BRIEF OF THE STATE OF TEXAS WILL WILSON Attorney General of TexasJAMES N.LUDLUM First Assistant Attorney GeneralHOUGHTON BROWNLEE,JR.JAMES H.ROGERS WALLACE B.CLIFT,JR.NEAL R.ALLENJOHN FLOWERSROBERT T.LEWIS Assistant Attorneys GeneralCapitol StationAustin,Texas Of Counsel: PRICE DANIEL Governor of TexasAustin,TexasJAMES P.HARTBrown BuildingAustin.Texas J.CHRYS DOUGHERTYROBERT J.HEARON,JR. Capital National Bank BuildingAustin 66,Texas August 13,1958 INDEX Page Preliminary Statement 1Nature of the Rights in Controversy 1Status of the Case 4Summary of Argument 5Argument I.The question before the Court is solely one of do-mestic law and is entirely limited to property rightsin the seabed and subsoil.It does not in any man-ner involve the overlying waters,or foreign policy,or international law. 7 A.The Government's Concessions 7 B.Since the controversy is wholly domestic,theissues should be decided without reference toforeign policy or international law... 9 C.Congress,upon advice from the State and Jus-tice Departments,drew the Act so as not toconflict with national foreign policy.---------11 1.Testimony—Justice Department 12 2.Testimony—State Departmen______----_-__13 D.The same question,presented in Alabama v.Texas,was held to be a domestic issue.. 18 E.The grant to Texas of rights to its three-leagueboundary is consistent with the national policyas declared by the President.___----------_____21 II.Texas'historic three-league boundary is the meas-ure of the transfer made to Texas by the UnitedStates under the Act.-------_--___-------------__--23 A.Sections 2,3,and 4 of the Act are clear.His-toric boundaries were carefully defined in Sec-tions 2 and 4.Section 3 effects a grant ofproperty rights out to these historic boun-daries.______--__------------------------_23 B.The legislative history shows that Congress in-tended to grant property rights to Texas meas-ured by its historic three-league seawardboundary 27 INDEX Page 1. Committee hearings recognized three lea-gues for Texas -- 28 2.Committee reports apply three leagues asmeasurement for Texas ___--___ 34 3.Maps used in Senate debate showed threeleagues for Texas 35 4.Floor debate recognized three leagues forTexas .. 37 5.Congress defeated four attempts to limitTexas to three miles 41 6.The President intended that the Act shouldgrant three leagues for Texas and soadvised the Congress. 46 7.Three-league intent and effect of the billwas public knowledge 48 8.Present State or National boundaries werenot intended as the measure of the grant.49 9.By the grant of property rights to Texasto its three-league historic boundary,Con-gress determined the territorial extent ofthe jurisdiction of the United States outto that boundary so as to make the grant effective 57 # C.Contemporaneous construction of the Act ac-cords with the intent to grant three leagues -- 59 1.Contemporaneous construction by FederalOfficials 59 2.Contemporaneous construction by thePresident of the United States 64 3.Contemporaneous construction by Con-gress 67 4.Contemporaneous construction by theStates 70 D.

FAQs

What is the central question presented to the Court?

The brief states the question is solely one of domestic law and is limited to property rights in the seabed and subsoil, without involving overlying waters, foreign policy, or international law.

How does the brief describe the role of the Submerged Lands Act?

It argues that the Act grants Texas property rights out to its historic three-league boundary, and that Congress intended this measure based on the Act’s text and legislative history.

Why does the brief say Texas’s three-league boundary supports the property grant?

It contends Texas had an existing three-league Gulfward boundary at the time it entered the Union, and that historical recognition and approval of that boundary support the grant’s territorial extent.

Sep 22, 2026

Upload by Callum