If they want to disallow water to be diverted to farming, that’s one thing, but singling one entity in this whole deal seems to be odd.
That's why the article is calling attention to the “140-year-old loophole” that is being exploited.
> If they want to disallow water to be diverted to farming, that’s one thing, but singling one entity in this whole deal seems to be odd.
They are singling out a federal grant from when the part of California involved was essentially uninhabited and the Colorado River wasn't heavily used that gives unlimited, no-usage-charge water to users in the particular locality where the Saudi farm is located.