3/18/2008

8 Comments

1. Ouch. Sorry, no way the shark fins should have won that one. Firstly, the KD II had previously registered as a fishing vessel, meaning its configuration is likely to be barely suitable for the general trade…ie, it was reregistered solely to avoid the Magnuson act; and secondly:
   

   We also reject the district court’s reasoning that the at-sea
   purchase of the shark fins constituted aiding and assisting
   because it allowed the foreign vessels to continue fishing for
   longer than they would have otherwise.

   Such a rejection flies in the face of decades of common practice at sea that I have personal knowledge of, so I find the court’s reasoning rather specious here.

   No way the fins should have won that one.

   Comment by EW1(SG) — 3/18/2008 @ 6:23 am

2. Need anymore reasons why we should pull out of the UN and have absolutly nothing to do with the wetched UN

   Comment by krazy kagu — 3/18/2008 @ 6:41 am

3. The Government seized the fins pursuant to the Shark Finning Prohibition Act (“SFPA”), which makes it unlawful for any person aboard a U.S. fishing vessel to possess shark fins obtained through prohibited “shark finning.” 16 U.S.C. § 1857(1)(P)(ii). TLH does not contest that, on its behalf, the KD II purchased the fins at sea from foreign vessels that engaged in shark finning. Instead, it argues that the KD II is not a fishing vessel under 16 U.S.C. § 1802(18)(B), and for that reason the forfeiture of the shark fins it possessed would violate due process. We agree that neither the statute nor the regulations provided fair notice to TLH that it would be considered a fishing vessel under § 1802(18)(B). We therefore reverse the judgment of forfeiture and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

   It’s a truly sad state of affairs when these activist judges tie our government’s hands by the very same laws the government made. That’s just unAmerican. We all know the government really meant that all vessels are fishing vessels if they have any fish parts on board. Only a liberal would let criminals keep the fruits of their crime on that kind of technicality.

   Well, at least that’ll have to pass for humor until I have some more coffee.

   Comment by Occasional Reader — 3/18/2008 @ 6:47 am

4. OR @ #3:
   

   It’s a truly sad state of affairs when these activist judges tie our government’s hands by the very same laws the government made.

   Nah, I just think the ‘fins pulled a fast one and got away.

   Comment by EW1(SG) — 3/18/2008 @ 6:57 am

5. Krazy Kagu: what does the UN have to do with a US court decision interpreting US law?

   Comment by aphrael — 3/18/2008 @ 8:11 am

6. Well, what happens at sea, stays at sea!
   And, of course, all vessels are fishing vessels if the Gummint says so. See “Queen of Hearts”

   Comment by Another Drew — 3/18/2008 @ 11:33 am

7. Someone’s definitely living up to their nick.

   Comment by SPQR — 3/18/2008 @ 2:54 pm

8. That caption caught my eye earlier today, too.

   Comment by Crank — 3/18/2008 @ 4:01 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.