Happy Tuesday! Welcome to the Supreme Court Brief! Today we've got coverage of Monday's hearing on a water rights obligations between the U.S. Government, the Navajo Nation and a group of impacted states. We also examined a dissent as part of Monday's orders in which Justice Jackson criticized the courts' use of 'Munsingwear vacatur'.  And finally we've got the rundown of those arguing before the high court this week as part of 'Who's at the Podium.'

As always, thanks for reading and we welcome feedback and tips. You may contact Avalon Zoppo at [email protected] follow her on Twitter @AvalonZoppo. You can find Brad Kutner at [email protected] and @bradkutner.

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM

Justices Eye Navajo Water Rights

U.S. Supreme Court justices probed the language of a century and a half year old treaty between the federal government and the Navajo Nation Monday. The tribe seeks an assessment and plan for the management of water, currently held in a trust by the federal government, they hope to access, but states and the government itself argue they are not bound to provide such needs. 

"You say you don't have to calculate water per capita [for the Navajo], but their breach of trust claim was about the U.S. not doing what it needs to do to determine what their water needs are," said Chief Justice John Roberts, seeking to clarify what the government believes is owed under the treaty of 1868 the tribe, and lower courts who sided with them, relied on.