VOLUME 83:6 (Forthcoming)
Development
Authors: John E. Holloway, Member, Chair of Maritime Law, Kaufman & Canoles, PC.
Title: The Search for Moby Dick: The Role of State Law in Maritime Tort Cases
Abstract:
For the last hundred years, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly attempted to reconcile two competing concepts. On the one hand, the idea that an efficient system of maritime commerce requires a uniform body of law – the “uniformity doctrine;” and on the other, the principle that a State has broad authority to regulate matters within its territory. As the Court observed back in 1917 in Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, it “would be difficult, if not impossible to define with exactness just how far the general maritime law may be changed, modified, or affected by state legislation” but that “this may be done to some extent.” Jensen’s guiding principle was that state legislation was not valid if it conflicts with federal legislation or “works material prejudice to the characteristic features of the general maritime law or interferes with the proper harmony and uniformity of that law in its international and interstate relations.”
Student Note
Author: Mary Jane Apostle, J.D. Candidate at Washington and Lee University School of Law
Title: Holding Museums Accountable: Utilizing Criminal Sanctions to Support Repatriation of Illegally Acquired Cultural Property
Abstract:
Antiquities trafficking is the third largest form of illegal trade in the world after arms and drugs. In 2020, over 850,000 stolen or looted antiquities were seized worldwide, with the illegal trade growing significantly due to the rise of social media and online platforms. International law, federal agencies, and civil liability have not been successful in curtailing the illegal antiquities trade.
This Note traces New York’s legal evolution from protecting museums that displayed looted artifacts to mandating greater transparency through origin and ownership disclosures. Central to this shift is the creation of the Antiquities Trafficking Unit (ATU) by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. The ATU is the first prosecutorial unit of its kind to integrate legal, investigative, and cultural expertise to combat art and antiquity crime. By utilizing state criminal law and procedure, the ATU has recovered over 6,000 antiquities worth over $480 million and successfully returned more than 5,700 to their countries of origin.
The civil litigation process for returning stolen cultural property enables well‑funded museums to drag out the litigation process for decades which often disadvantages the true owners. In contrast, this Note argues that the ATU can wield the criminal system to provide more balanced results holding both individuals and large institutions equally accountable for their involvement in the illegal antiquities trade. New York’s approach with the ATU offers a state‑level framework for other art‑market cities seeking to disrupt the expanding illegal antiquities trade.
