Mainbrace

Blank Rome Assembles Cross-Practice Trade Enforcement Team

Blank Rome recently launched a new Trade Enforcement Team, drawing upon the strengths of its leading Maritime, International Trade, White Collar Defense & Investigations, False Claims Act (“FCA”), and Government Contracts practices. This strategic initiative is designed to support clients in addressing the growing complexity and frequency of government investigations related to trade controls, sanctions, financial crimes, maritime regulations, and false claims.

Laern more about the team at Blank Rome Assembles Cross-Practice Trade Enforcement Team Amid Increasing Government Investigations.

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.

Now Available: Eighth Edition of Time Charters

The eighth edition of Time Charters is now available, fully revised to provide a comprehensive guide for professionals navigating time charter agreements. Proudly co-authored by Blank Rome partner Thomas H. Belknap, Jr., who serves as co-chair of the firm’s Maritime group, and senior counsel John D. Kimball, alongside Sir Andrew Baker and Julian Kenny, this acclaimed work is recognized as the leading authority on time charter law. It serves shipping lawyers, shipowners, charterers, P&I Club members, and insurers by delivering clear analysis and practical solutions.

Offers current, in-depth legal analysis from industry professionals
Widely relied upon by practitioners, shipowners, charterers, and insurers globally
Provides thorough coverage designed for practical problem resolution

To purchase a copy of Time Charters, visit Time Charters – 8th Edition.

Note from the Editor

The maritime industry, as a whole, is extremely collegial and driven by personal relationships. I have been very lucky to have developed so many personal friendships that grew from business relationships. In particular, as a maritime lawyer, I have been fortunate to have travelled to many places, near and far, and have worked with many impressive people across the globe. One of those people was Jim Lawrence. For those who did not have the pleasure of knowing Jim, he was, among other things, the founder of MTI Network, and led Marine Money’s and the Connecticut Maritime Association’s annual conferences.

I first became acquainted with Jim when he emceed the annual Admirals’ Dinner at SUNY Maritime College. Laughter came easy while Jim spoke. Jim’s accomplishments and reputation preceded him well before I got to know him better in 2015 while we both were working on the El Faro matter. The knowledge and guidance Jim provided to his clients during times of crisis was invaluable. Jim’s smile and sunny disposition were, to me, his hallmark during those times of crisis.

On behalf of the Blank Rome Maritime team, thank you Jim for your friendship. Our crew is one less, we sail shorthanded, and so we mourn, but to Jim we say:

That Hand is you, Old Sailor.

And you’ll be sailing out on Heavenly Seas.

May the wind be ever at your back.

Fair weather, and God Speed.

– William R. Bennett III

Mainbrace Editors

Navigating Uncertainty: How Recent IEEPA Tariff Rulings Impact the Maritime Industry

Keith B. Letourneau and Holli B. Packer ●

On May 28, 2025, the United States Court of International Trade (“CIT”) issued a landmark decision in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States,[1] holding that tariffs imposed by the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) exceeded the statutory authority granted by Congress. The CIT vacated the challenged tariff orders and permanently enjoined their enforcement nationwide. However, less than 24 hours later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily stayed the CIT’s order, preserving the tariffs while the government’s appeal is pending. A separate decision from the D.C. District Court also found the President’s IEEPA tariffs to be beyond the scope of the statute, though it imposed a more limited injunction.[2]

The CIT’s decision is significant for the maritime industry, as it directly challenges the President’s ability to impose broad, unbounded tariffs on imports under IEEPA. The CIT emphasized that IEEPA does not grant the President unlimited authority to regulate importation through tariffs, and that any such delegation of power must be clearly limited and guided by statutory principles. The CIT found that the tariffs in question—ranging from a 10 percent rate on all imports to higher, country-specific duties—were not sufficiently tied to the “unusual and extraordinary threat” required by IEEPA and lacked meaningful limitations in scope or duration.

FMC Announces Investigation Into Flags of Convenience and Unfavorable Conditions Created by Flagging Practices

Matthew J. Thomas, Jeanne M. Grasso, Kierstan L. Carlson, and Natalie M. Radabaugh ●

The U.S. Federal Maritime Commission (“FMC”) announced on May 21, 2025 that it is initiating a non-adjudicatory investigation into whether the: 1) vessel flagging laws, regulations, and/or practices of certain foreign governments, including the so-called flags of convenience (“FOC” or “open registries”), or 2) competitive methods employed by owners, operators, agents, or masters of foreign-flag vessels, are creating unfavorable shipping conditions in the foreign trade of the United States (the “Notice”).

The investigation includes a 90-day public comment period, which ends on August 20, 2025.

FMC’s “Section 19” Trade Authority

Section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, 46 U.S.C. § 42101 et seq., authorizes the FMC to evaluate conditions that affect U.S. shipping in foreign trade and to issue regulations or take action to address such conditions. Potential remedies include port fees up to one million U.S. dollars, limits on voyages to and from U.S. ports or the amount or type of cargo carried, and other trade restrictions.

The FMC exercised this authority frequently in the 1980s and 90s (before the sell-off of the major U.S. liner operators to foreign buyers) to force market-opening concessions and eliminate discriminatory fees and trade barriers that impeded U.S. shipping companies’ competitiveness in overseas. However, these powers have been left nearly dormant for the past two decades.

Regulatory Developments: Maritime Emissions

Vanessa C. DiDomenico ●

Maritime environmental regulations have become increasingly prominent internationally as concerns over climate change and air pollution intensify. The shipping industry is under mounting pressure from governments, environmental organizations, and the public to reduce its environmental footprint. This pressure is compounded by the complexity of navigating a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, making compliance a critical and challenging priority for maritime stakeholders. International cooperation has been essential in shaping these regulations, as countries and organizations work together to establish unified standards and enforcement mechanisms.

Specifically, the International Maritime Organization (“IMO”) has introduced several amendments to MARPOL Annex VI (emissions) that are entering into force within the next few months and are expected to significantly influence vessel operations and compliance strategies worldwide. These regulatory developments are expected to have far-reaching effects on global shipping practices, driving innovation and operational changes across the industry. Below is a selection of recent and upcoming maritime emissions-related regulatory developments, which demonstrate the global impact and growing importance of these regulations.

Navigating Maritime Evidence: The Power and Practice of Using Demonstrative Aids in Litigation

Douglas J. Shoemaker, Keith B. Letourneau, and Holli B. Packer ●

Navigating the complexities of maritime litigation presents unique challenges distinct from other areas of law. The cases are often steeped in technical detail, involving complex vessel operations, intricate navigation principles, and highly specialized equipment. For judges and juries—many of whom may have little or no maritime experience—grasping the nuances of such cases can be a daunting task. This is where demonstrative aids help to transform dense, technical evidence into clear, compelling presentations that illuminate the facts and arguments at the heart of a dispute. Drawing on recent developments in the Federal Rules of Evidence and illustrative case law, demonstrative aids can be the difference between confusion and clarity, disengagement and persuasion, and, ultimately, between losing and winning a case.

Legal Framework: Federal Rules of Evidence and Demonstrative Aids

The use of demonstrative aids is governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”), local court rules, and case law. Two rules are particularly central: FRE 107 and FRE 1006.

Navigating Safely: Tips for Commercial and Recreational Vessels Operating near Military Craft

Alan M. Weigel, Neil P. McMillan, and Holli B. Packer ●

Every day, commercial, recreational, and military vessels encounter one another on the seas with different prerogatives—moving product as safely and efficiently as possible, enjoying a day on the water, or completing a mission, whatever that might be. This article will provide context to commercial, merchant, and recreational craft regarding the types of military craft and operations they may encounter in order to make better-informed maneuvering decisions.

Surface Vessels

Anticipated Locations: U.S. Navy surface vessels sail around the globe—however, the highest density areas are: Everett, Washington; San Diego, California; Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; Mayport, Florida; Norfolk, Virginia; Rota, Spain; Yokosuka, Japan; Sasebo, Japan; and Manama, Bahrain.

Bridge Manning: Military vessels in the U.S. Navy Surface Fleet are not manned in the same way merchant vessels are. It is common during normal operations for there to be upwards of seven watchstanders on the bridge at any given time or upwards of ten during special operations (Sea & Anchor Detail, Underway Replenishment, etc.). During normal operations, it is common to have an Officer of the Deck, Junior Officer of the Deck, Conning Officer, Helm, Boatswain’s Mate of the Watch, and two lookouts. Expect delays in responding to radio calls as each Captain has different reporting requirements that may require the Officer of the Deck to contact them before responding.

When Vessels Meet: Military vessels will generally have a greater factor of safety regarding the closest point of approach than their civilian counterparts. Commercial vessels should anticipate earlier and more frequent radio calls than may be expected in the vicinity of commercial or recreational traffic. Unlike commercial traffic, military vessels are often not traveling at the same consistent course and speed. If such vessels are operating on a mission or conducting a training exercise, you may see what appears to be significant course and speed changes in short iteration.

Spotlight on …

Get to know Blank Rome Maritime team members Vanessa C. DiDomenico and Luke M. Reid.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: