Update on the Vaquita

On June 14, 2023, the U.S. Court of International Trade approved the voluntary dismissal of a case brought by a group of environmental organizations to force the U.S. government to take action to force Mexico to better implement steps to protect the grievously endangered vaquita. Prior posts on related legal efforts in this matter are here and here. The vaquita is a small porpoise that is endemic to Mexican waters in the Gulf of California. Unfortunately, its range overlaps with totoaba, which is subject to illegal fishing because the totoaba's swim bladder is prized in China for its apocryphal effectiveness in traditional medicine. As a result of illegal totoaba gill net fishing, there are 10 to 13 vaquitas remaining in the world. Unless there are dramatic changes in the bycatch of vaquita, the vaquita is will likely become extinct.



The decision is not legally very important because the parties reached a settlement and there was no need for the Court to make important findings of facts or law. The decision is, however, an important report on the perilous status of the vaquitas and on American efforts to pressure Mexico to act. 

This case involved the Pelly Amendment to the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967 and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora ("CITES") as legal levelers the plaintiffs asked the United States employ to protect the vaquita. Under CITES, the vaquita (Phocoena sinus) is an Appendix I animal, meaning it is among the most threatened of species. The Pelly Amendment requires that the Secretary of the Interior certify to the President that a foreign country is engaging in trade in a manner that diminishes the effectiveness of any "international program for endangered or threatened species. CITES is clearly such a program.

In 2014, the Center for Biological Diversity sent a letter to the Secretary of the Interior asking that the Secretary make that certification with respect to the vaquita. The Secretary never responded and the plaintiffs filed suit in the Court of International Trade.

Subsequently, the United States took some actions to pressure Mexico on this issue. For example, the United States raised the issue to the CITES Standing Committee, which then asked Mexico to strengthen its protections. That step and follow-up from the CITES organization prompted Mexico to take additional concrete steps. 

Then, in April of this year, the parties reached an understanding that the Secretary of Interior to complete its review under the Pelly Amendment. The Court stayed the case pending that decision from the Interior Department. On May 18, 2023, the Secretary certified to the President that nationals of Mexico were engaging in taking of or trade in totoaba and the bycatch of the vaquita diminishing the effectiveness of CITES. The President must notify Congress of any action he takes to encourage conservation of the vaquita and the totoaba. So far, no such statement has been made. 

The Court held a short conference on this matter, which was recorded and available to the public. Counsel for the plaintiffs explained that the settlement should not be understood to indicate that the vaquita is safe. Rather, it means only that this one avenue of legal recourse has been completed. The prior case involving the Marine Mammals Protection Act resulted in an injunction prohibiting the importation of certain products of Mexico. The third legal avenue yet to be completed is under Chapter 24 of the USMCA. The Commission for Environmental Cooperation is the tri-lateral bureaucracy that investigates complaints concerning ineffective enforcement of environmental laws in North America. In April 2022, the CEC recommended the development of a factual record, which should have been submitted to the CEC Council by July 5, 2022.  The public record ends there, and it is unclear whether the factual record was submitted. 

Closing its decision, the Court reiterated its prior statement that "every death [of the vaquita] brings it perilously close to disappearing from the planet forever . . . [T]he need for vigorous international enforcement against its continuing threat is a compelling one. . .  The panda of the sea, the little cow, is irreplaceable." 

The NRDC has a good summary of the litigation over vaquita conservation here. You can also contribute to the NRDC from that page to support its work. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ruling of the Week 2015.8: Old Jersey and Pitcairn Island

Image
For today's ROTW, I set out looking for a ruling dealing with some far off and preferably warm location. Turns out that, with the exception of coastwise transit issues, there are no Customs and Border Protection rulings involving Pitcairn Island or any of several Pacific Ocean microstates including Tuvalu , Niue , and Kiribati . Pitcairn Island What I did find is an interesting question about the country of origin marking for products of the Bailiwick of Jersey Island, Channel Islands. The ruling is HQ 561938 (Mar. 18, 2002). For those of you who may not know, Jersey is an island off the coast of Normandy, France. It is an independent international actor and not part of the U.K. although the U.K. is responsible for its defense and external relations. Also, the Queen is the Head of State in her capacity as "the Crown in Right of Jersey." It is, according to the U.S. Department of State, a " Crown Dependency " along with the Isle of Man and the Bailiwick o...
Read more

CAFC Decision in Double Invoicing Case

The Federal Circuit has issued a decision on the merits in United States v. Inn Foods, Inc.  There had been a previous decision on jurisdiction, which was followed by a trial at the Court of International Trade and then this appeal on the substance. The initial issue is whether Inn Foods' invoicing practice amounts to fraud.  Inn Foods had been receiving an invoice from growers in Mexico that had a relatively low sales prices on it.  Subsequent to entry, Inn Foods created a second invoice at something more similar to market value, retaining the original invoice number, and paid at that higher amount.   Superficially, this looks like a standard-issue double-invoicing scheme.  But, in the age of reconciliation, is it really more like a provisional pricing mechanism?  It might have been possible to make that argument had Inn Foods adjusted its entries accordingly.  It didn't and the loss of revenue was approximately $624,000.  Based on testimony and evidence indicating both knowl...
Read more

Ninestar and UFLPA Exhaustion

Image
Exhaustion is a key doctrine in administrative law. When applicable, it requires that a party unhappy with an agency’s determination complete the administrative appeal process before turning to the courts for judicial review. Requiring exhaustion typically promotes judicial efficiency by ensuring that disputes are resolved at the agency and, if they are not, that there is a complete record of the agency process. Exhaustion also ensures that the judiciary respects the executive agencies and their expertise.  There are, on the other hand, times when the courts will find that exhaustion is not necessary or appropriate. Such is the case in  Ninestar Corporation et al. v. United States  et al., a decision of the U.S. Court of International Trade.  Ninestar is also interesting because it is one of the first cases in the CIT involving the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, known as UFLPA. In my hiatus from active blogging, I missed the rise of UFLPA as a major compliance t...
Read more