Seafood Coalition, Including Restaurant Law Center, Sues NOAA Over Marine Mammal Protection Act Implementation

Washington, D.C. – The Restaurant Law Center, along with the National Fisheries Institute and key seafood suppliers, has filed a lawsuit against the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) over its implementation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), citing serious economic and operational consequences for American restaurants and their supply chains.

The lawsuit challenges NOAA’s September 2, 2025, decision that triggered a sweeping import ban on January 1, 2026. These fisheries supply the vast majority of some seafood products critical to U.S. restaurants.

“This is not about opposing the Marine Mammal Protection Act—we support its goals,” said Angelo Amador, Executive Director of the Restaurant Law Center. “But NOAA’s rushed and opaque implementation is poised to devastate seafood supply chains that restaurants across the country rely on. Without access to these products, many restaurants will be forced to remove popular seafood items from their menus, raise prices, or worse—close their doors.”

The Restaurant Law Center, the only public policy organization created specifically to represent the foodservice industry in the courts, joined the lawsuit to defend the interests of over one million restaurants and foodservice outlets nationwide. The Restaurant Law Center argues that NOAA failed to consider the interests of U.S. businesses and the real-world consequences of its decision, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

"Restaurants are already facing tight margins and labor shortages,” Amador continued. “This abrupt ban—announced with just four months’ notice—will cause menu disruptions, contract breaches, and job losses across the foodservice sector. NOAA’s failure to engage stakeholders or consider the economic fallout is not just irresponsible—it’s unlawful.”

The plaintiffs, including seafood processors, importers, and distributors, emphasize that there are no viable domestic alternatives to the banned imports. U.S. fisheries cannot meet the volume, quality, or form required by the restaurant industry. The complaint also highlights that many of the affected foreign fisheries have invested heavily in sustainability and bycatch reduction yet were denied access based on procedural gaps rather than conservation outcomes.
 

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York City. Plaintiffs are seeking to vacate the import bans and compel NOAA to reconsider its determinations using a lawful, results-based approach that aligns with the MMPA’s intent and the realities of the global seafood supply chain.