The creation of any obstruction not affirmatively authorized by Congress, to the navigable capacity of any of the waters of the United States is prohibited; and it shall not be lawful to build or commence the building of any wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other structures in any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, navigable river, or other water of the United States, outside established harbor lines, or where no harbor lines have been established, except on plans recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army; and it shall not be lawful to excavate or fill, or in any manner to alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of, any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, lake, harbor of refuge, or inclosure within the limits of any breakwater, or of the channel of any navigable water of the United States, unless the work has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army prior to beginning the same.
Notes of Decisions
Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979).
· cites it 6× “In 1972, a dispute arose between petitioners and the Corps concerning whether (1) petitioners were required to obtain authorization from the Corps, in accordance with § 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899, 33 U. S. C. § 403 , [2] for future construction,…”
United States of Am. v. West Indies Transp., Inc.; Wit Equip. Co., Inc.; & W. James Oelsner, Appellants, 127 F.3d 299 (3rd Cir. 1997).
· cites it 7× “Defendants were convicted for violating the Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 U.S.C. § 403 , which provides, in part: *596 it shall not be lawful to build or commence the building of any wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other structures in .”
Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651 (2023).
· cites it 3× “1151 (codifed, as amended, at 33 U. S. C. § 403 ) (prohibiting unauthorized obstructions “to the naviga- ble capacity of any of the waters of the United States”).”
United States v. Milner, 583 F.3d 1174 (9th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 5× “FLETCHER, Circuit Judge: In this appeal we decide whether a group of waterfront homeowners are liable for common law trespass and violations of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899(RHA), 33 U.S.C. § 403 , and the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.”
Bd. of Commissioners v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., 850 F.3d 714 (5th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 2× “§ 404 (allowing the Secretary of the Army to grant permits "to make deposits in any tidal harbor or river of the United States beyond any harbor lines established under authority of the United States”); 33 U.S.C. § 403 (requiring federal permission to “excavate or fill, or in…”
Tull v. United States, 481 U.S. 412 (1987).
· cites it 2× “33 U. S. C. § 403 . Petitioner does not base his Seventh Amendment claim on the Government's prosecution under this statute, which provides for injunctive relief but not for civil penalties.”
United States v. Schmitt, 734 F. Supp. 1035 (E.D.N.Y 1990).
· cites it 13× “This application by the Government to preliminarily enjoin certain defendants who operate a marina within Jamaica Bay from violating the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act, 33 U.S.C. § 403 , the Clean Water Act, 33 U.”
Hearts Bluff Game Ranch, Inc. v. State, 381 S.W.3d 468 (Tex. 2012).
· cites it 2× “(authorizing the Secretary of the Army, acting through the “Chief of Engineers,” to issue these permits); Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. § 403 (similar); 33 C.F.R. §§ 332.”
California v. Sierra Club, 451 U.S. 287 (1981).
· cites it 2× “1151 , 33 U. S. C. § 403 . [3] The federal defendants were the Secretary of the Interior, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Secretary of the Army, the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Division Engineer of the Corps' South Pacific…”
Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 894 F.3d 692 (5th Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “§ 1344 , and Sections 10 and 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. §§ 403 , 408, allowing it to build a 162-mile crude oil pipeline from Lake Charles, Louisiana to terminals near St.”
Wyandotte Transp. Co. v. United States, 389 U.S. 191 (1967).
· cites it 4× “§ 406 , which provides penalties for violations of § 10, 33 U. S. C. § 403 , [9] expressly authorizes the injunctive remedy.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.