U.S. Code » Title 43 » Chapter CHAPTER 29— SUBMERGED LANDS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— LANDS BENEATH NAVIGABLE WATERS WITHIN STATE BOUNDARIES

43 U.S.C. § 1313

Exceptions from operation of section 1311 of this title

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 43 CasesGoogle Scholar
There is excepted from the operation of section 1311 of this title—(a) all tracts or parcels of land together with all accretions thereto, resources therein, or improvements thereon, title to which has been lawfully and expressly acquired by the United States from any State or from any person in whom title had vested under the law of the State or of the United States, and all lands which the United States lawfully holds under the law of the State; all lands expressly retained by or ceded to the United States when the State entered the Union (otherwise than by a general retention or cession of lands underlying the marginal sea); all lands acquired by the United States by eminent domain proceedings, purchase, cession, gift, or otherwise in a proprietary capacity; all lands filled in, built up, or otherwise reclaimed by the United States for its own use; and any rights the United States has in lands presently and actually occupied by the United States under claim of right;(b) such lands beneath navigable waters held, or any interest in which is held by the United States for the benefit of any tribe, band, or group of Indians or for individual Indians; and(c) all structures and improvements constructed by the United States in the exercise of its navigational servitude.(May 22, 1953, ch. 65, title II, § 5, 67 Stat. 32.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1960–2025 · leading case: F.E.B. Corp. v. United States, 818 F.3d 681 (11th Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
F.E.B. Corp. v. United States, 818 F.3d 681 (11th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “” 43 U.S.C. § 1313 (a) (emphasis added). 6 *688 F.”
United States v. Alaska, 521 U.S. 1 (1997). · cites it 6× “43 U. S. C. § 1313 (a) (emphasis added). We cannot resolve "doubts" about whether the United States has withheld state title to submerged lands beneath the territorial sea in the United States' favor, for doing so would require us to find an "express" retention of submerged…”
United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978). · cites it 8× “[7] The parties have stipulated that "the United States `presently and actually occupied' the areas within one nautical mile of the shoreline of Anacapa and Santa *47 Barbara Islands for purposes of Section 5 of the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, 43 U. S. C. § 1313 ." [8] The…”
California Ex Rel. State Lands Comm'n v. United States, 457 U.S. 273 (1982). · cites it 4× “[11] 43 U. S. C. § 1313 (a). In *284 light of this provision, borrowing for federal-law purposes a state rule that would divest federal ownership is foreclosed.”
State of Alaska v. Bruce Babbitt, Sec'y of the Interior, Katie John v. United States of Am., 72 F.3d 698 (9th Cir. 1995). · cites it 2× “43 U.S.C. § 1313 (a). Since only dry land can have accretions, Black's Law Dictionary 19 (5th ed.”
Sorum v. State, 2020 ND 175 (N.D. 2020). “” 43 U.S.C. § 1313 (a). The federal government acquired the bed of Lake Sakakawea above the historical OHWM by purchase or eminent domain so that it could be inundated by the Garrison Dam.”
John Sturgeon v. Sue Masica, 872 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “at 33–34; see also 43 U.S.C. § 1313 (a) (excepting from the Submerged Lands Act “lands expressly retained by .”
United States v. Florida, 425 U.S. 791 (1976). · cites it 2× “rida is entitled to all the lands, minerals, and other natural resources underlying the Atlantic Ocean extending seaward from its coastline for a distance of 3 geographic miles, and the United States is not entitled, as against *792 the State of Florida, to any interest in such…”
United States v. F.E.B. Corp., 52 F.4th 916 (11th Cir. 2022). “posits that if dredged lands were “lands filled in, built up, or otherwise reclaimed by the United USCA11 Case: 20-14047 Date Filed: 11/01/2022 Page: 27 of 33 20-14047 Opinion of the Court 27 States for its own use,”43 U.S.C. § 1313(a) (emphasis added), merely because the United…”
State of California, Ex Rel. State Lands Comm'n v. United States of Am., Donald P. Hodel, Sec'y of the Interior, Sierra Club, Intervenors, 805 F.2d 857 (9th Cir. 1986). · cites it 2× “The Supreme Court held that because Congress has addressed the issue of accretions to federal lands abutting state-owned submerged lands in section 5(a) of the Submerged Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1313 (a) (1982), that section precludes borrowing for federal law purposes a state…”
Gov't of Guam ex rel. Guam Econ. Dev. Auth. v. United States, 179 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “the United States when the State entered the Union.’ Notwithstanding the literal tie to a specific date, this provision has been construed to exempt from transfer land that emerged after statehood and after passage of the Submerged Lands Act.”
United States v. Alaska, 503 U.S. 569 (1992). “” 43 U. S. C. § 1313 (a). Furthermore, as to the lands granted to the States, the SLA provides that “[t]he United States retains all its navigational servitude and rights in and powers of regulation and control of said lands and navigable waters for the.”
Show all 42 citing cases →
— 43 U.S.C. § 1313(a) — 1 case
United States v. F.E.B. Corp., 52 F.4th 916 (11th Cir. 2022). “posits that if dredged lands were “lands filled in, built up, or otherwise reclaimed by the United USCA11 Case: 20-14047 Date Filed: 11/01/2022 Page: 27 of 33 20-14047 Opinion of the Court 27 States for its own use,”43 U.S.C. § 1313(a) (emphasis added), merely because the United…”
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.