In the case of Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Burrell Day and Joel McDaniel (2012), farmers argued that
A) the rights to the water in the aquifer were beyond the reach of the federal government because of a long-standing precedent dating back to Mexican common law.
B) they had the rights to the water based upon their ownership of the land above it.
C) they had water rights because they have prior claim pursuant to Texas sovereignty under federalism.
D) they had water rights based on the eminent domain doctrine of the federal Constitution.
E) unless water is in a sealed container aboveground, no one can own it.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The farmers argued that they had the rights to the water based on their ownership of the land above it. This argument is based on the concept of "absolute ownership," which holds that a landowner has complete control over the land and everything beneath it, including any groundwater resources. However, this argument was rejected by the court, which upheld the regulatory authority of the Edwards Aquifer Authority over the use of groundwater resources in the region.

In the Case of Edwards Aquifer Authority V