UNITED STATES v. LOUISIANA et al. (LOUISIANA BOUNDARY CASE)
No. 9,
Orig.
Decided March 17, 1975, and April 28, 1980
Decree entered March 17, 1975
Supplemental decree entered June 16, 1975
Final decree entered June 22, 1981
Order entered June 1, 1982.
ORDER
Pursuant to this Court’s Final Decree herein entered on June 22, 1981, 452 U. S. 726, the United States and the State of Louisiana filed their Final Accountings, and, subsequently, each party filed Objections to the Accounting of the other. By an Order entered on January 11, 1982, 454 U. S. 1135, the Court referred the said Objections to its Special Master. The parties have now agreed upon these matters, have submitted to the Special Master a proposed Order, and the Special Master, with the concurrence of both parties, has recommended its entry by the Court.
Accordingly,
It Is Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed:
1. The Final Report of the Special Master is received and ordered filed.
2. The objections to accountings previously filed are sustained to the extent recommended in the Report of the Special Master.
3. All accountings required by the Court’s Decree of June 22, 1981, have been made and, as supplemented by the ruling on the objections thereto, are now approved.
4. The United States is directed forthwith to pay over to the State of Louisiana the outstanding sum of $3,251,609.76.
5. After the payment directed by paragraph 4 above, neither party shall be accountable to the other for any further payment in respect of the matters in controversy in these proceedings between the United States and the State of Louisiana.
6. Upon receipt by the State of Louisiana of the payment directed by paragraph 4, above, the Interim Agreement of October 12,1956, shall be deemed terminated for all purposes and all sums remaining in the impounded fund account established pursuant to that Agreement are unconditionally released to the United States.
7. The account submitted by the Special Master is approved and the balance owing to him shall be paid in equal shares by the United States and the State of Louisiana.
8. The Special Master is discharged in this case insofar as the proceedings involve the controversy between the United States and the State of Louisiana.
Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.
What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to determine the ideological "direction" of the decision ("liberal", "conservative", or "unspecifiable"). Use "unspecifiable" if the issue does not lend itself to a liberal or conservative description (e.g., a boundary dispute between two states, real property, wills and estates), or because no convention exists as to which is the liberal side and which is the conservative side (e.g., the legislative veto). Specification of the ideological direction comports with conventional usage. In the context of issues pertaining to criminal procedure, civil rights, First Amendment, due process, privacy, and attorneys, consider liberal to be pro-person accused or convicted of crime, or denied a jury trial, pro-civil liberties or civil rights claimant, especially those exercising less protected civil rights (e.g., homosexuality), pro-child or juvenile, pro-indigent pro-Indian, pro-affirmative action, pro-neutrality in establishment clause cases, pro-female in abortion, pro-underdog, anti-slavery, incorporation of foreign territories anti-government in the context of due process, except for takings clause cases where a pro-government, anti-owner vote is considered liberal except in criminal forfeiture cases or those where the taking is pro-business violation of due process by exercising jurisdiction over nonresident, pro-attorney or governmental official in non-liability cases, pro-accountability and/or anti-corruption in campaign spending pro-privacy vis-a-vis the 1st Amendment where the privacy invaded is that of mental incompetents, pro-disclosure in Freedom of Information Act issues except for employment and student records. In the context of issues pertaining to unions and economic activity, consider liberal to be pro-union except in union antitrust where liberal = pro-competition, pro-government, anti-business anti-employer, pro-competition, pro-injured person, pro-indigent, pro-small business vis-a-vis large business pro-state/anti-business in state tax cases, pro-debtor, pro-bankrupt, pro-Indian, pro-environmental protection, pro-economic underdog pro-consumer, pro-accountability in governmental corruption, pro-original grantee, purchaser, or occupant in state and territorial land claims anti-union member or employee vis-a-vis union, anti-union in union antitrust, anti-union in union or closed shop, pro-trial in arbitration. In the context of issues pertaining to judicial power, consider liberal to be pro-exercise of judicial power, pro-judicial "activism", pro-judicial review of administrative action. In the context of issues pertaining to federalism, consider liberal to be pro-federal power, pro-executive power in executive/congressional disputes, anti-state. In the context of issues pertaining to federal taxation, consider liberal to be pro-United States and conservative pro-taxpayer. In miscellaneous, consider conservative the incorporation of foreign territories and executive authority vis-a-vis congress or the states or judcial authority vis-a-vis state or federal legislative authority, and consider liberal legislative veto. In interstate relations and private law issues, consider unspecifiable in all cases.