104 F.4th 815
11th Cir.2024Background
- In 2021, the U.S. Coast Guard seized a vessel without clear nationality, about 69 nautical miles off the coast of the Dominican Republic, within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
- The crew claimed Colombian nationality, but Colombia could not confirm or deny the vessel's registry, rendering it stateless under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA).
- Authorities discovered 12 bales of cocaine aboard; appellants were arrested and brought to the U.S., where they were charged with conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute aboard a vessel subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
- Appellants moved to dismiss, arguing the MDLEA was unconstitutional as applied in the EEZ and that Congress lacked authority under the Felonies Clause to criminalize conduct there.
- After denial, appellants pled guilty to one count but appealed on constitutional grounds, raising a new challenge to the MDLEA's definition of "vessel without nationality."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the EEZ part of the "high seas" under the Felonies Clause? | EEZ is not part of the "high seas" by modern international law, thus beyond Congress’s authority. | EEZ is part of high seas as originally understood; Congress has authority. | EEZ is part of the "high seas" for Felonies Clause purposes. |
| Constitutionality of MDLEA’s definition of “vessel without nationality” | Verbal claim of nationality is sufficient under international law; statute overreaches. | U.S. can define stateless vessels where registry cannot be confirmed or denied. | No plain error; definition is constitutional and follows precedent. |
| Whether MDLEA requires nexus to the U.S. for prosecution | No nexus; prosecution exceeds Congress’s power and violates Due Process. | No nexus required; circuit precedent supports MDLEA's broad application. | Precedent forecloses argument; no nexus to U.S. necessary. |
| Review of unpreserved constitutional challenges under plain error | Raised for first time on appeal, should be reviewed de novo for subject matter. | Issue is an unpreserved constitutional challenge, subject to plain error. | Plain error review applies; no binding authority establishes error. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bellaizac-Hurtado, 700 F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 2012) (Offences Clause powers are limited by customary international law; does not control Felonies Clause analysis)
- United States v. Estupinan, 453 F.3d 1336 (11th Cir. 2006) (MDLEA is a valid exercise of Congress’s Felonies Clause power)
- United States v. Campbell, 743 F.3d 802 (11th Cir. 2014) (extraterritorial MDLEA convictions upheld under Felonies Clause)
- United States v. Alarcon Sanchez, 972 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2020) ("high seas" begins outside territorial waters, in historical and modern context)
- United States v. Beyle, 782 F.3d 159 (4th Cir. 2015) (EEZ is considered part of the high seas for purposes of federal criminal jurisdiction)
- United States v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249 (1893) ("high seas" includes waters outside the exclusive control of any one nation)