Mike, you wrote, concerning Washington and the SLA:
> yes maybe
> but as you also indicate
> washington had already extended its seaward boundaries to the
> international boundaries of the usa upon its admission to the union
> so i think it didnt qualify as a state that had not already done so
I see what you're saying, but consider this next line from the SLA:
"Any claim heretofore or hereafter asserted either by
constitutional provision, statute, or otherwise, indicating the
intent of a State so to extend its boundaries is approved and
confirmed..."
So, the SLA authorized all non-original states that had not already done so to
extend their boundaries to the international boundaries of the US in any body of
water traversed thereby, and it approved and confirmed any such extensions
previously asserted.
> it does appear to qualify however as a state whose seaward boundaries
> were subject to reduction by the sla in 1953
> say
> just like those of atlantic florida were
> which i believe actually did get reduced from 9nm to 3nm
Florida got reduced from three leagues to three nautical miles in the Atlantic,
because the SLA says that no state can have more than 3nm in the Atlantic or
Pacific, but the SLA makes specific exceptions for the Gulf of Mexico, the Great
Lakes, and the waters through which the international boundaries run. This is
why Florida did not get reduced in the Gulf, and neither did the Great Lakes
states nor Washington.
> so in view of this apparent exception
> as well as my sense that the question hasnt actually been resolved
> yet for washington
> i will hold out for better proof
> or rather any actual proof at all
Okay, how about this:
In 2000, the Supremes were faced with a pair of cases US v. Washington and
INTERTANKO v. Washington. At issue was whether federal regulations on tanker
ship safety pre-empted tougher Washington state regulations in state waters. In
their ruling, the Supremes wrote:
__________________
The State of Washington embraces some of the Nation's most significant
waters and coastal regions... Of special significance in this case is the
inland sea of Puget Sound, a 2,500 square mile body of water consisting of
inlets, bays, and channels. More than 200 islands are located within the sound,
and it sustains fisheries and plant and animal life of immense value to the
Nation and to the world.
Passage from the Pacific Ocean to the quieter Puget Sound is through the
Strait of Juan de Fuca, a channel 12 miles wide and 65 miles long which divides
Washington from the Canadian Province of British Columbia. The international
boundary is located midchannel. Access to Vancouver, Canada's largest port, is
through the strait. Traffic inbound from the Pacific Ocean, whether destined to
ports in the United States or Canada, is routed through Washington's waters;
outbound traffic, whether from a port in Washington or Vancouver, is directed
through Canadian waters.
__________________
Although Washington's state regulations were found to be pre-empted, it wasn't
because the waters were not state waters, but rather because regulation of
interstate and foreign commerce is a federal constitutional prerogative. There
was not a hint of doubt that these were state waters.
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA