BY ROBERT J. SMITH

Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006

U. S. Supreme Court justices met privately Friday and were scheduled to have a preliminary discussion about a dispute between Arkansas and Oklahoma.

Edward Turner, a deputy public information officer, confirmed Friday that the dispute brought to the high court’s attention by Arkansas Attorney General Mike Beebe in November was among issues scheduled for conference Friday morning.

It will be at least Tuesday before the court releases whether the justices discussed the Arkansas-Oklahoma matter or made any decisions about it, Turner said.

If the issue wasn’t brought up Friday morning, the justices could discuss it during their next conference Feb. 24.

The justices will release an orders list Tuesday morning, detailing the decisions they’ve made and which cases they’ve agreed to consider, Turner said.

Beebe asked the high court in November to wade into the dispute about water pollution.

That request occurred because Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson filed a lawsuit in U. S. District Court in Tulsa accusing poultry companies with operations in Arkansas of allowing poultry waste to pollute the Illinois River watershed.

The sued companies are Cargill Inc. of Minneapolis; Cobb-Vantress Inc. and Simmons Foods, both of Siloam Springs; George’s Inc. of Springdale; Peterson Farms Inc. of Decatur; Tyson Foods Inc. of Springdale; Willow Brook Foods of Springfield, Mo.; and Cal-Maine Foods Inc. of Jackson, Miss.

Beebe stepped into that dispute, saying Edmondson was trying to apply Oklahoma laws to Arkansas companies and that makes the dispute one between the two states.

Most cases considered by the Supreme Court are ones previously considered in state and federal courts. An exception spelled out in the U. S. Constitution allows two-state disputes to be taken up by the high court. Those are called “original jurisdiction” cases.

Beebe contends the dispute between the states should have been addressed by the Arkansas-Oklahoma Arkansas River Compact Commission instead of in federal court. He said the compact commission, which was created by Congress to address water-quality and water-quantity issues and includes three commissioners from each state, is the “proper forum” to raise interstate watershed pollution concerns.

Edmondson disagrees that the federal lawsuit is one worthy of the Supreme Court’s attention. In papers filed with the Supreme Court last month, Edmondson said Beebe’s desire to get the Supreme Court involved “is nothing more than an attempt by Arkansas to use its status as a state to shield private companies from being liable for their intentional pollution of Oklahoma’s natural resources.”

Edmondson also said in his court filing that Arkansas’ request for the court’s involvement doesn’t “present issues of sufficient dignity and seriousness to warrant the exercise of this court’s original jurisdiction.”