The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Wednesday in a 5-4 decision that it will not follow the recommendation of a Special Master it had appointed to dismiss a suit brought to the court by Florida. In Florida v. Georgia [docket] Florida petitioned the court asking for an equal division of a basin at the confluence of the Chattahoochee, Flint, and Apalachicola rivers.

The Court reasoned that the Special Master erroneously concluded that Florida didn’t show that the Court could “fashion an effective equitable decree.” The court also held that the Special Master will have to resolve other evidentiary issues before the case proceeds.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the majority, noting that

We believe the Master’s standard, as indicated by these statements, is too strict. In our view, unless and until the Special Master makes the findings of fact necessary to determine the nature and scope of likely harm caused by the absence of water and the amount of additional water necessary to ameliorate that harm significantly, the complaining State should not have to prove with specificity the details of an eventually workable decree by “clear and convincing” evidence.

Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Ginsburg joined the majority opinion. Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion which Justices Kagan, Gorsuch, and Alito joined.