Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico

Target entity: Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico
Context triple: [Indian Commerce Clause, citedInCase, Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico]

• A. Kleppe v. New Mexico
  Kleppe v. New Mexico is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed broad federal authority over public lands and wildlife under the Constitution’s Property Clause.
• B. Bullcoming v. New Mexico
  Bullcoming v. New Mexico is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the Confrontation Clause by holding that defendants have the right to cross-examine the specific analyst who prepared a forensic laboratory report used as evidence against them.
• C. Texas v. New Mexico
  Texas v. New Mexico is a U.S. Supreme Court interstate water rights case involving disputes over allocation and enforcement of river water compacts between the states.
• D. Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
  Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the authority of non-Article III bankruptcy courts and reshaped the constitutional framework for federal bankruptcy adjudication.
• E. Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176 (1982)
  Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176 (1982), is a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing an interstate water rights dispute over the apportionment of the Vermejo River between Colorado and New Mexico.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target entity: Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico
Target entity description: Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state’s authority to impose severance taxes on non-Indian companies extracting oil and gas from tribal lands, clarifying limits on the Indian Commerce Clause and state taxation in Indian country.

• A. Kleppe v. New Mexico
  Kleppe v. New Mexico is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed broad federal authority over public lands and wildlife under the Constitution’s Property Clause.
• B. Bullcoming v. New Mexico
  Bullcoming v. New Mexico is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the Confrontation Clause by holding that defendants have the right to cross-examine the specific analyst who prepared a forensic laboratory report used as evidence against them.
• C. Texas v. New Mexico
  Texas v. New Mexico is a U.S. Supreme Court interstate water rights case involving disputes over allocation and enforcement of river water compacts between the states.
• D. Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
  Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the authority of non-Article III bankruptcy courts and reshaped the constitutional framework for federal bankruptcy adjudication.
• E. Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176 (1982)
  Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176 (1982), is a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing an interstate water rights dispute over the apportionment of the Vermejo River between Colorado and New Mexico.
• F. None of above. chosen