Page:New York v. New Jersey (2023).pdf/3

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Cite as: 598 U. S. ____ (2023)
1

Opinion of the Court

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


No. 156, Orig.


NEW YORK v. NEW JERSEY
ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
[April 18, 2023]

Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court.

Under Article I, §10, of the Constitution, each State possesses the sovereign authority to enter into a compact with another State, subject to Congress’s approval. In 1953, New York and New Jersey exercised that authority and entered into the Waterfront Commission Compact. The Compact created a bistate agency to perform certain regulatory and law-enforcement functions at the Port of New York and New Jersey. In 2018, after concluding that the decades-old Compact had outlived its usefulness, New Jersey sought to withdraw from the Compact. New York opposes New Jersey’s withdrawal and contends that the Compact does not allow either State to unilaterally withdraw. We hold that New Jersey may unilaterally withdraw from the Waterfront Commission Compact notwithstanding New York’s opposition.

I

In 1951, New York and New Jersey began a joint investigation of organized crime at the Port of New York and New Jersey, a commercial port that spans the border of the two States. To address corruption within the labor force on both sides of the Port, each State enacted legislation to form the Waterfront Commission Compact. See 1953 N. J.