Category: Mainbrace | April 2026

Note from the Editor

I recently had coffee with an acquaintance who works in real estate. He was aware that our law practice has a focus on shipping and presumed we were very busy because of the events taking place in the Strait of Hormuz. What was most interesting about his pre­sumption and the conversation that followed, was the awareness that geopolitical events that affect shipping cause significant disruption to global economic stability. He discussed the increased costs associated with managing buildings, in part due to rising fuel costs leading to increased prices for products and services. In addition to the economic impli­cations, I explained to him about the increased pressures placed on owners, managers, insurers, and crew to keep ships moving safely and efficiently. This month’s issue touches on several issues related to the Iran War, including disruptions to navigation and legal risk, and also includes a primer on the Jones Act waiver related to the transportation of oil, natural gas, and other products between U.S. ports. 

At the end of our coffee, I felt like I had given a class on the basics of global shipping to an eager pupil who was ready to learn about how the international shipping industry affects our daily lives. It is hard to imagine the chaos and destruction that would ensue if shipping came to a worldwide halt. We would quickly revert to the Dark Ages. In short, international shipping is vital to supporting the global supply chain and ensuring stable economies, and governments must allow for free navigation.

— William R. Bennett III, Editor

Mainbrace Editors

William R. Bennett III, Co-Editor
Emma C. Jones,
Co-Editor
Holli B. Packer, Associate Editor

High Seas Treaty Takes Force: What You Need to Know

Jeanne M. Grasso and Holli B. Packer ●

Roughly two thirds of the ocean lies outside of any country’s jurisdiction. This area, encompassing about half of the Earth’s total surface, is known as the “high seas.” The high seas hold huge importance to the health of the planet, with rich biodiversity and natural resources. A comprehensive framework to govern and safeguard the high seas has been absent, until now. 

Commonly known as the “High Seas Treaty,” the Agreement on the Conversation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction or “BBNJ Agreement,” was ratified in September 2025 and officially entered into force on January 17, 2026. From this date, ratifying countries are legally bound by the BBNJ Agreement to support conservation and sustainable management of high seas biodiversity. 

Why Does It Matter and What Is Included?

The BBNJ Agreement is the first legally binding convention that provides for comprehensive management of resources on the high seas. Absent a binding global agreement, governance of the high seas consisted of a patchwork of regional fisheries agreements, shipping conventions, and Marine Protected Areas (“MPAs”) that covered less than one percent of the high seas. The BBNJ Agreement is intended to fill regulatory gaps, complementing national efforts and enabling coordinated conservation measures on the high seas.

Continue reading “High Seas Treaty Takes Force: What You Need to Know”

The Iran War and International Shipping: Navigating Disruption and Legal Risk in the International Shipping and Logistics Industries

Keith B. Letourneau, Natalie M. Radabaugh, and G. Evan Spencer ●


The escalation of armed conflict involving the United States, Israel, Iran, and certain Gulf states following coordinated U.S.-Israeli airstrikes in late February 2026 has significantly and immediately impacted international shipping and logistics. The Strait of Hormuz—a major maritime choke point for the global energy trade—has effectively been shut down, with daily vessel transits collapsing to a fraction of pre-war levels. The consequences for international shipping and logistics are substantial, and the potential legal implications for participants across the global maritime, energy, and supply chain industries are equally far-reaching.

Operational Disruption

Not long after the initial airstrikes began, Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz—through which roughly 20 million barrels of crude oil and more than 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) transit daily—and warned commercial vessels against transiting through the waterway. As a result, according to Windward and the BBC, transits through the Strait of Hormuz are down 94 percent (or roughly down to only five to six vessel transits per day in contrast to the pre-war average of 120–140 per day) since the start of hostilities, Arabian Gulf port calls dropped by 47 percent within just two weeks of the conflict’s start, and crude exports from ports west of the Strait (e.g., ports in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates) dropped by 87 percent. Iran has attacked and damaged multiple commercial vessels, resulting in the deaths of numerous seafarers. Many other vessels have been diverted or left awaiting clearance as nearby ports quickly fill up. 

The disruption extends far beyond just the immediate areas near the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels of all types have been rerouted, including carriers opting to sail around the Cape of Good Hope similar to what was done in response to the Red Sea crisis. This voyage around Africa adds 10 to 14 days and sharply increases overall voyage transportation costs. Many ocean carriers have also pulled back from plans to resume Red Sea services in light of events.

Continue reading “The Iran War and International Shipping: Navigating Disruption and Legal Risk in the International Shipping and Logistics Industries”

Trump Administration Issues 60-Day Jones Act Waiver Amid the Iran War

Keith B. Letourneau, Natalie M. Radabaugh, and G. Evan Spencer ●


Based on a request by the Department of War, the Trump Administration announced a 60-day limited waiver of the Jones Act (46 U.S.C. § 55102) on March 17, 2026, in response to energy market volatility amid the ongoing U.S.-Israel war against Iran. According to the March 19 bulletin published by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), the waiver permits foreign-flag vessels to transport certain goods, including oil, natural gas, coal, and fertilizer (see full List of Potentially Covered Products as of March 18 2026), between U.S. ports for the duration of the waiver period, which will expire on May 17, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. E.D.T. 

Background on the Jones Act

The Jones Act (formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920) was enacted by Congress in 1920 as part of an effort to rebuild the U.S. shipping industry after World War I. At its core are regulations over coastwise trade, which require that any vessel transporting goods or passengers between U.S. ports must be built in the United States, 75-percent-owned by U.S. citizens at every tier of ownership, and crewed by U.S. citizens with limited exceptions—effectively barring foreign-flag vessels from the U.S. domestic maritime trade. While the law has long been supported by domestic shipping companies and shipyards, labor unions, and national security advocates, it does in effect reduce the number of potential vessels available to move goods around the United States, to the ire of various consumer groups. 

Continue reading “Trump Administration Issues 60-Day Jones Act Waiver Amid the Iran War”

Navigating DOJ’s New Corporate Enforcement Landscape: Key Considerations for Environmental Voluntary Self-Disclosures

Gregory F. Linsin and Holli B. Packer ●

The Department of Justice (“DOJ” or the “Department”) released its new Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (“CEP”) on March 10, 2026, establishing, for the first time, a single, comprehensive framework governing all corporate criminal matters handled by the Department, with the exception of antitrust offenses. While the CEP shares similarities with prior division-specific DOJ policies, a comparison to the previous Environmental Crimes Section’s Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (“ECS Policy”) reveals notable differences that maritime industry personnel should understand. As this policy landscape continues to evolve, stakeholders will need to monitor how these differences play out in practice before drawing conclusions about the new policy’s practical impact.

Background

Both the DOJ’s new CEP and the prior ECS Policy attempt to encourage responsible corporate behavior by providing incentives for companies to voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, cooperate with investigations, and remediate wrongdoing. The prior ECS Policy, drafted in accordance with the Deputy Attorney General’s September 2022 memorandum regarding corporate criminal enforcement policies, focused specifically on environmental criminal matters and the concerns they implicate, including protection of the environment, public health, worker safety, wildlife, and natural resources. The new CEP, by contrast, supersedes all division-specific policies and applies broadly to all corporate criminal matters handled by the Department, with the exception of antitrust violations under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-38. 

Continue reading “Navigating DOJ’s New Corporate Enforcement Landscape: Key Considerations for Environmental Voluntary Self-Disclosures”

Navigating U.S. Arrival: A Guide for Vessels on Port Entry and Inspections on Arrival

Luke M. Reid, Jeanne M. Grasso, Matthew J. Thomas, and Holli B. Packer ●

When a vessel arrives in a U.S. port, its owners, operators, and crew face a complex regulatory environment. The United States presents challenges for vessels because U.S. federal laws and regulations, and in some cases state-level requirements, are often different than laws and regulations applied in other jurisdictions around the world. In this regard, the United States has many regulatory requirements that go beyond what is contained in the international conventions applicable to international shipping. Understanding these U.S.-specific regulations requires careful preparation to help ensure strict compliance. 

This article provides general guidance on what vessels must do when arriving at U.S. ports and offers practical advice for engaging with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), the U.S. Coast Guard (“USCG”), and other federal agencies.

Understanding the Regulatory Landscape

The USCG and CBP are the primary agencies responsible for enforcing laws applicable to foreign and domestic vessels calling at U.S. ports. The USCG enforces international conventions implemented by U.S. law and other U.S. laws under its Port State Control (“PSC”) authority. CBP enforces federal customs and immigration laws at U.S. ports of entry, as well as other requirements delegated to it by other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Both agencies possess broad authority to board and inspect vessels, examine documents and cargo, and ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Under its PSC authority, the USCG conducts examinations of foreign-flag vessels arriving in a U.S. port or place, and enforces key international conventions within U.S. ports, including the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (“SOLAS”), the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (“MARPOL”), and the International Convention on Standards of Training Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”), among others. More generally, CBP officers and USCG PSC officers have broad law enforcement authority to conduct warrantless inspections and searches of foreign-flag vessels while in U.S. waters.

Continue reading “Navigating U.S. Arrival: A Guide for Vessels on Port Entry and Inspections on Arrival”

Reconnaissance as Legal Due Diligence: Lessons from Land to Sea

G. Evan Spencer and Paige F. Wahoff ●

Prior to joining Blank Rome, CPT (Ret.) Paige Wahoff served as a U.S. Army Armor Officer and Judge Advocate, holding a range of Cavalry leadership and staff positions. Her assignments included Scout Platoon Leader for A Troop and Assistant S3 Operations Officer with 6th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division at Fort Bliss, Texas. Paige is in the general litigation practice group in Blank Rome’s Chicago office, and is available to support the Maritime Group in litigation matters. 

In the Army, you are taught that uncertainty is best confronted with discipline, purpose, and established processes. Reconnaissance is traditionally understood as a military activity aimed at reducing uncertainty, shaping decision-making, and enabling freedom of action. It is a purpose-driven activity, tightly calibrated to answer mission-critical questions and shape action in complex, contested, and often austere environments. This doctrine also has potent legal resonance in the maritime industry, which wrestles with overlapping regulatory regimes, dynamic risk landscapes, and heightened enforcement scrutiny.

Contemporary maritime operations are vulnerable to strategic competition, hybrid threats, and regulatory exposure, and the maritime domain is becoming an information environment as much as a physical one. Applying the Army’s reconnaissance fundamentals* to this domain reframes reconnaissance as a form of institutionalized due diligence: a legal, operational, and ethical obligation to anticipate risk, maintain situational awareness, and act responsibly in an interconnected global system. This article translates the Army’s reconnaissance fundamentals into actionable insights for maritime law and liability, using recent examples to illustrate how failure to apply these fundamentals can compound legal exposure.

1. Ensure Continuous Reconnaissance 

The Army fundamental of “ensure continuous reconnaissance” means that information collection is never episodic or limited to a single phase of an operation. Commanders direct reconnaissance operations throughout all stages and critical events, and assign assets to best maintain a flow of relevant information. This persistent collection of information allows decisionmakers to identify and seize key terrain, confirm or deny military intelligence, develop courses of action, and maintain the unit’s most strategic position without relying on outdated or incomplete information. 

Continue reading “Reconnaissance as Legal Due Diligence: Lessons from Land to Sea”

Spotlight on …

Get to know Blank Rome Maritime team members Thomas H. Belknap Jr., Neil P. McMillan, and Alan M. Weigel. 

Continue reading “Spotlight on …”

News & Rankings

Blank Rome Recognized in China Business Law Journal’s 2025 Deals of the Year

Blank Rome has been recognized in China Business Law Journal’s 2025 Deals of the Year in the International Trade Investigations category. The firm was honored for its work advising on U.S. sanctions de‑listing matters. In July 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury formally and unconditionally removed the vessel MV Xuan Ning, owned by Jinghan Shipping, from the Specially Designated Nationals list. The Blank Rome team was led by partners Matthew J. Thomas and Victoria Ortega. Read More >>

Chambers Global 2026 Recognizes Blank Rome Attorneys and Practices

Chambers Global 2026 recognized Blank Rome as a global leader in Shipping: Litigation. Senior counsel John D. Kimball was also recognized in Shipping: Litigation for his industry knowledge and leading practices. Read More >>

Continue reading “News & Rankings”

Severe Weather Emergency Recovery Team (“SWERT”)

SWERT is an interdisciplinary group of Blank Rome attorneys and government relations professionals with decades of experience helping companies and individuals recover from severe weather events, including hurricanes, wildfires, mudslides, snowstorms, earthquakes, and tornadoes. We are ready to assist those in the path of storms and other severe weather events. 

Learn more at blankrome.com/SWERT.

Exit mobile version
%%footer%%