CAPPAERT ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES ET AL.; AND NEVADA EX REL. WESTERGARD V. UNITED STATES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106 (U.S. 1976)
  …h the declaration and cease any discrimination between needy patients seeking therapeutic and nontherapeutic abortions. 508 F. 2d, at 1213-1216. We granted certiorari, limited to the two questions identified in the opening paragraph of this opinion. 422 U. S. 1041 (1975). II Although we are not certain that they have been clearly separated in the District Court’s and Court of Appeals’ opinions, two distinct standing questions are presented. We have distinguished them in prior cases, e. g., Data Processing S…
• Env't Prot. Agency v. Cal. ex rel. State Water Res. Control Bd., 426 U.S. 200 (U.S. 1976)
  …opriate constitutional conditions for subjecting federal installations to state regulation, and held that federal installations were required to secure state NPDES permits. 511 F. 2d 963, 973 (CA9 1975). We granted the EPA’s petition for certiorari, 422 U. S. 1041 (1975), and now reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals. rH 1 — 1 1 — 1 Our decision in this case is governed by the same fundamental principles applied today in Hancock v. Train, ante, at 179: Federal installations are subject to state regul…
• Cappaert v. United States, 426 U.S. 128 (U.S. 1976)
  …t the state administrative procedures granting the Cappaerts’ permit did not bar resolution of the United States’ suit in Federal District Court. [*138] We granted certiorari to consider the scope of the implied-reservation-of-water-rights doctrine. 422 U. S. 1041 (1975). We affirm. I Reserved-Water-Rights Doctrine This Court has long held that when the Federal Government withdraws its land from the public domain and reserves it for a federal purpose, the Government, by implication, reserves appurtenant wa…