⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Eleventh Circuit hears Southern Cross Seafoods versus the United States, a dispute over a shipment of Chilean sea bass. In 2022, the importer sought federal approval to bring in fish caught around South Georgia. An international commission normally set seasonal catch limits there by consensus. But Russia blocked agreement on the limit for that season. The National Marine Fisheries Service rejected the import application, treating the absence of an agreed limit as making the harvest unauthorized. Southern Cross challenged that refusal, but the district court ruled for the government. The company will argue that no applicable conservation measure actually prohibited the catch, so the missing limit cannot justify rejecting its import. The government will argue that the existing rules required an agreed limit and must be read in light of the treaty's conservation purpose. The question is what happens when that consensus system breaks down: does the lack of a limit leave fishing permitted, or prevent this catch from being imported?

Southern Cross Seafoods, LLC, Appellant v. United States, et al. (No. 25-11722) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued November 6, 2026.