logo
Nebraska sues neighboring Colorado over how much water it's drawing from the South Platte River

Nebraska sues neighboring Colorado over how much water it's drawing from the South Platte River

Washington Post16-07-2025
OMAHA, Neb. — Nebraska is suing Colorado over the amount of water it draws from the South Platte River, the latest in a long history of water rights disputes between the states that have been left increasingly dry by climate change.
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen and state Attorney General Mike Hilgers held a news conference Wednesday to announce the lawsuit, which was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court.
'It's crystal clear. Colorado has been holding water back from Nebraska for almost 100 years and getting more and more egregious every single day,' Pillen said, pointing to Colorado's rapidly expanding population over the past decade.
'So today it's really, really simple: We're here to put our gloves on,' Pillen said. 'We're going to fight like heck. We're going to get every drop of water.'
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser called the lawsuit 'unfortunate' in a written statement and said Nebraska officials failed 'to look for reasonable solutions.'
The lawsuit accuses Colorado of depriving Nebraska of as much as 1.3 million acre-feet (about 160,350 hectare-meters) of water from the river over several years that Nebraska is entitled to under a 1923 compact between the states. The suit also accuses Colorado officials of blocking Nebraska's effort to construct a massive canal — often called the Perkins County Canal — and reservoir project that would see Nebraska seize land in Colorado to divert water into Nebraska, which is also allowed under the compact.
Nebraska needs the water not only for agriculture production in its southwestern region — which climate experts predict will grow hotter and drier in the coming decades — but also to feed water supplies in the eastern part of the state, officials said. Nebraska's capital, Lincoln, is expected to get 12% of its water from the proposed canal, Pillen said.
The compact entitles Nebraska to 120 cubic feet (3.4 cubic meters) per second from the river during the irrigation season between April 1 and Oct. 15 each year, and 500 cubic feet (about 14 cubic meters) per second during the non-irrigation fall and winter months. Hilgers said Colorado has been shortchanging Nebraska during the irrigation season, allowing only about 75 cubic feet (about 2 cubic meters) per second of water daily into Nebraska this summer.
'I think this may be the most consequential lawsuit that this office will be a part of in my generation,' Hilgers said. 'It is almost impossible to overstate the importance of the South Platte River to the future of the state of Nebraska.'
The South Platte, which flows through northeastern Colorado into southwestern Nebraska, has been at the center of a tempest brewing between the two states going back to 2022, when Nebraska announced it would build the canal.
Since then, officials from the two states have been haggling over how to carry out both the terms of the compact and land acquisition to build the canal.
'It became clear, despite the very professional and intentional scope of those negotiations, that we were at an impasse,' Hilgers said.
Weiser countered that Nebraska officials should have remained at the negotiating table.
'Nebraska's actions will force Colorado water users to build additional new projects to lessen the impact of the proposed Perkins County Canal,' he said. 'When the dust finally settles, likely over a billion dollars will have been spent — tens of millions of that on litigation alone — and no one in Nebraska or Colorado will be better off.'
Hilgers said the lawsuit was filed directly with the Supreme Court because it handles disputes between states. The process 'isn't fast,' Hilgers warned.
'We'll probably have a special master appointed within the next 12 months, and under normal litigation timelines, that's maybe 3 to 5 years before we get a result,' he said.
That does not mean work on the canal will stop, he said, as he expects work on permitting and design of the canal to continue.
Nebraska has been at the center of interstate water disputes for decades. In 2002, Nebraska, Colorado and Kansas reached a settlement over Republican River water allocation after years of legal wrangling. But disputes continued, and new agreements were reached among the states again in 2014.
Water disputes could become more common as climate change worsens shortages, said Dr. Carly Phillips, a research scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists — a nonprofit that advocates for climate change solutions.
Warmer temperatures affect multiple parts of the hydrological cycle, Phillips said. It is decreasing the snowpack, which is the main way water is stored in the western U.S. Higher temperatures also mean the snow melts earlier each year, changing the availability of stream flow. And states like Nebraska might see increased irrigation demand when it's hotter.
'These patterns are all in the same direction across the board,' Phillips said. 'The trends are really consistent when it comes to snowpack, stream flow, evaporation and irrigation demand.'
____
Associated Press reporter Sarah Raza contributed from Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A Tunisian musician was detained in LA after living in US for a decade. His doctor wife speaks out
A Tunisian musician was detained in LA after living in US for a decade. His doctor wife speaks out

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

A Tunisian musician was detained in LA after living in US for a decade. His doctor wife speaks out

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Dr. Wafaa Alrashid noticed fewer of her patients were showing up for their appointments at the Los Angeles area hospital where she works as immigration raids spread fear among the Latino population she serves. The Utah-born chief medical officer at Huntington Hospital understood their fear on a personal level. Her husband Rami Othmane, a Tunisian singer and classical musician, began carrying a receipt of his pending green card application around with him. Over the past few months, immigration agents have arrested hundreds of people in Southern California, prompting protests against the federal raids and the subsequent deployment of the National Guard and Marines. Despite living in the U.S. for a decade as one of thousands of residents married to U.S. citizens, he was swept up in the crackdown. On July 13, Othmane was stopped while driving to a grocery store in Pasadena. He quickly pulled out his paperwork to show federal immigration agents. 'They didn't care, they said, 'Please step out of the car,'' Alrashid recalled hearing the officers say as she watched her husband's arrest in horror over FaceTime. Alrashid immediately jumped in her car and followed her phone to his location. She arrived just in time to see the outline of his head in the back of a vehicle driving away. 'That was probably the worst day of my life," she said. The Trump administration's crackdown on illegal immigration has ensnared not only immigrants without legal status but legal permanent residents like Othmane who has green cards. Some U.S. citizens have even been arrested. Meanwhile, many asylum-seekers who have regular check-in appointments are being arrested in the hallways outside courtrooms as the White House works toward its promise of mass deportations. Alrashid said her husband has been in the U.S. since 2015 and overstayed his visa, but his deportation order was dismissed in 2020. They wed in March 2025 and immediately filed for a green card. After his arrest, he was taken to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in downtown Los Angeles where he was held in a freezing cold room with 'no beds, no pillows, no blankets, no soap, no toothbrushes and toothpaste, and when you're in a room with people, the bathroom's open,' she said. The Department of Homeland Security in an emailed statement noted the expiration of his tourist visa but did not address the dismissal of the deportation order in 2020 nor his pending green card application. The agency denied any allegations of mistreatment, and said "ensuring the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in our custody is a top priority at ICE.' Alrashid said for years her husband has performed classical Arabic music across Southern California. They first met when he was singing at a restaurant. 'He's the kindest person,' Alrashid said, adding that he gave a sweater she brought him to a fellow detainee and to give others privacy, he built a makeshift barrier around the open toilet using trash bags. 'He's brought a lot to the community, a lot of people love his music," she said. More than a week after his arrest, fellow musicians, immigration advocates and activists joined Alrashid in a rally outside the facility. A few of his colleagues performed classical Arabic music, drumming loud enough that they hoped the detainees inside could hear them. Los Jornaleros del Norte musicians, who often play Spanish-language music at rallies, also were there. 'In Latin American culture, the serenade — to bring music to people — is an act of love and kindness. But in this moment, bringing music to people who are in captivity is also an act of resistance," said Pablo Alvarado, co-executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. Leading up to the rally, Alrashid was worried because she hadn't received her daily call from her husband and was told she couldn't visit him that day at the detention facility. She finally heard from him that evening. Othmane told her over the phone he was now at an immigration detention facility in Arizona, and that his left leg was swollen. 'They should ultrasound your leg, don't take a risk,' she said. Alrashid hopes to get her husband out on bail while his case is being processed. They had a procedural hearing on Thursday where the judge verified his immigration status, and have a bail bond hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Until then, she'll continue waiting for his next phone call.

Her Dispensary Was Set to Open. Then New York Got in the Way.
Her Dispensary Was Set to Open. Then New York Got in the Way.

New York Times

time40 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Her Dispensary Was Set to Open. Then New York Got in the Way.

After trying to open a legal cannabis dispensary in New York for three years, Nubia Ashley was close to achieving her goal, possibly as soon as this month. Then on Monday, she got an email from the state's cannabis agency admitting that it had made a significant error. The agency, which had approved her store's location in March, said the address was closer to a nearby school than the 500 feet allowed by state law. It was the agency's fault that the distance had been measured incorrectly, the email said, but Ms. Ashley would need to move. 'I'm trying to remain as positive as I possibly can because I was like this close to open, just so close,' Ms. Ashley, 37, said. 'And then I get hit with this letter.' The jarring message was a result of a sudden policy shift that threw the future of more than 150 existing and planned dispensaries into question. Regulators had previously measured the 500-foot distance from a dispensary's entrance to a school's. But on Monday, officials said the distance should have been measured from the school's property line. An intense backlash from some license-holders, lawmakers and former regulators followed. They questioned why Gov. Kathy Hochul's administration had made such an abrupt change that could hurt people who followed the state's rules. Several lawsuits are in the works that could ultimately cost New York taxpayers millions of dollars in damages. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps

CNN

time40 minutes ago

  • CNN

Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps

Immigration Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a 'mountain of evidence' that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guards and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many who have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, 'I was born here in the states, East LA bro!' They want to 'send us back to a world where a US citizen … can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood,' American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. 'It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution,' attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. 'Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion,' Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. 'No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all,' Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a 'broad profile' and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors 'cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status.' She also asked: 'What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store