726:
llllllllll A BILL To repeal the Jones Act restrictions on coastwise trade and for other purposes. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Open America’s 5 Waters Act’’. 6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF JONES ACT LIMITATIONS ON COAST7 WISE TRADE. 8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 12112(a) of title 46, 9 United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 2 EAS10264 S.L.C. 1 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A coastwise endorsement may be 2 issued for a vessel that qualifies under the laws of the 3 United States to engage in the coastwise trade.’’. 4 (b) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 90 days after the 5 date of the enactment of this Act, the Commandant of 6 the United States Coast Guard shall issue regulations to 7 implement the amendment made by subsection (a). Such 8 regulations shall require that a vessel permitted to en9 gaged in the coastwise trade meets all appropriate safety 10 and security requirements. 11 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 12 (1) TANK VESSEL CONSTRUCTION STAND13 ARDS.—Section 3703a(c)(1)(C) of title 46, United 14 States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘Coast Guard 15 and is qualified for documentation as a wrecked ves16 sel under section 12112 of this title.’’ and inserting 17 ‘‘Coast Guard.’’. 18 (2) LIQUIFIED GAS TANKERS.—Section 12120 19 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by strik20 ing ‘‘United States,’’ and all that follows and insert21 ing ‘‘United States.’’. 22 (3) SMALL PASSENGER VESSELS.—Section 23 12121(b) of title 46, United States Code, is amend24 ed by striking ‘‘12112,’’. 3 EAS10264 S.L.C. 1 (4) LOSS OF COASTWISE TRADE PRIVILEGES.— 2 Section 12132 of title 46, United States Code, is re3 pealed. 4 (5) TABLE OF SECTIONS.—The table of sections 5 for chapter 121 of title 46, United States Code, is 6 amended by striking the item relating to section 7 12132.
993:
content that disagrees with your point of view. Your issue relating to unreliable sources is bogus. Who would be more qualified relating to facts about the
Merchant Marine Act of 1920 than those that deal with it on a daily basis. The American Maritime Partnership represents a great many United States companies in the maritime industry that are familiar with all facets of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. Both Criticism and Support may be subjective on some level. Certainly those that are familiar with the law and those affected by the law are entitled to present the facts in proper perspective. If you were concerned about the integrity of the article why did you allow the criticism section to remain while you constantly delete the support section. If there is room for criticism there must be room for support. The perspective may differ from yours but it is a valid perspective and the sources are reliable.
695:“This was highlighted by a 1999 U.S. International Trade Commission economic study, which suggested that a repeal of the Jones Act would lower shipping costs by approximately 22 percent. Also, a 2002 economic study from the same Commission found that repealing the Jones Act would have an annual positive welfare effect of $ 656 million on the overall U.S. economy. Since these studies are the most recent statistics available, imagine the impact a repeal of the Jones Act would have today: far more than a $ 656 million annual positive welfare impact – maybe closer to $ 1 billion. These statistics demonstrate that a repeal of the Jones Act could prove to be a true stimulus to our economy in the midst of such difficult economic times.
698:“The Jones Act also adds a real, direct cost to consumers – particularly consumers in Hawaii and Alaska. A 1988 GAO report found that the Jones Act was costing Alaskan families between $ 1,921 and $ 4,821 annually for increased prices paid on goods shipped from the mainland. In 1997, a Hawaii government official asserted that ‘Hawaii residents pay an additional $ 1 billion per year in higher prices because of the Jones Act. This amounts to approximately $ 3,000 for every household in Hawaii.’”
692:“Today I am pleased to introduce legislation that would fully repeal the Jones Act, a 1920s law that hinders free trade and favors labor unions over consumers. Specifically, the Jones Act requires that all goods shipped between waterborne ports of the United States be carried by vessels built in the United States and owned and operated by Americans. This restriction only serves to raise shipping costs, thereby making U.S. farmers less competitive and increasing costs for American consumers.
74:
701:“This antiquated and protectionist law has been predominantly featured in the news as of late due to the Gulf Coast oil spill. Within a week of the explosion, 13 countries, including several European nations, offered assistance from vessels and crews with experience in removing oil spill debris, and as of June 21st, the State Department has acknowledged that overall ‘it has had 21 aid offers from 17 countries.’ However, due to the Jones Act, these vessels are not permitted in U.S. waters.
53:
707:“Therefore, some Senators have put forward legislation to waive the Jones Act during emergency situations, and I am proud to co-sponsor this legislation. However, the best course of action is to permanently repeal the Jones Act in order to boost the economy, saving consumers hundreds of millions of dollars. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort to repeal this unnecessary, antiquated legislation in order to spur job creation and promote free trade.”
84:
203:
185:
213:
288:
22:
594:“Within a week of the explosion, 13 countries, including several European nations, offered assistance from vessels and crews with experience in removing oil spill debris, and as of June 21, the State Department has acknowledged that overall, ‘it has had 21 aid offers from 17 countries.’ However, due to the Jones Act, these vessels are not permitted in U.S. waters,” McCain said.
1289:
623:
Last week Obama’s obstructionism took the form of refusing to waive the Jones Act, which was tantamount to rejecting offers of help with the cleanup from contractors in possession of some of the world’s most state-of-the-art oil skimming equipment. The reason for Obama’s reticence? The contractors in
433:
This article has many sentences that are really dependent clauses that often begin with the word "Although." In some cases these should be joined to the previous or following sentence (depending on the context). In some cases, the word "although" should be eliminated altogether, turning the dependent
755:
would seem to be the operative section. It specifies "waters of the United States," not any particular number of miles. Note that according to this section, the Coast Guard cannot grant a waiver, not even in an emergency, unless the foreign country allows U.S. ships to operate in its waters. I doubt
635:
The bill, titled the Open
America’s Waters Act, notes that the Jones Act hinders free trade and raises both shipping costs and the concomitant cost of goods passed on to the American consumer. In its most immediate form, of course, the law would expedite efforts to clean the badly polluted waters of
1182:
According to an article in the NY Times today "Under the law, any foreign registry vessel that enters Puerto Rico must pay punitive tariffs, fees and taxes, which are passed on to the Puerto Rican consumer. The foreign vessel has one other option: It can reroute to
Jacksonville, Fla., where all the
1122:
This article might benefit from the following: in the introduction, checking or revising the citation of the Act itself. Ref 2 cites 46. U.S.C. § 50101 et seq., but I don't see in
Chapter 501 the anti-cabotage rules. Those rules are central to the Jones Act subject (and controversies). Q: revise
799:
The act wanted to protect american shipowners, shipyards and other transport companies from international competition. The result is that coastwise traffic is trucked instead of shipped by sea. The US has no internationally operating merchant fleet (unless on charter by the government, which has to
617:
Obstructionist has become one of Barack Obama’s favorite epithets, one that he hurls with alacrity at any
Republican who opposes his radical agenda. When it comes to the Gulf oil leak, however, the man most deserving of that pejorative label is the president himself. Earlier this week, he shut down
845:
There are several uncited or dead-link cited statements in the
Criticism and Support sections. The sentence in the intro section that starts "As global trade increased..." is also uncited and feels a little heavy-handed. I'm going to tag the sections for citations, and if there's no updating, I'll
605:
The group said the State
Department reported that offers from Mexican skimmers, Norwegian skimming systems and other assets from Canada, Germany and the Netherlands, have been accepted for work in international waters beyond three miles from shore. The cabotage task force said that if foreign-flag
1390:
What is incorrect? Are you claiming that a family member created the site, and that you're merely promoting it for the family member? Are you claiming that you created the site on behalf of a family member? Why are you and/or this family member using the site as a lead promotion site for lawyers?
1157:
This was an attempt to close a loophole created by a pending Ninth
Circuit decision, which ultimately held that a shipment of goods from New York to California by way of Belgium was outside the scope of the coastwise trade laws then in force. See United States v. 250 Kegs of Nails, 61 F. 410, 413
725:
EAS10264 S.L.C. 111TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. ll To repeal the Jones Act restrictions on coastwise trade and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES llllllllll Mr. MCCAIN (for himself and Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the
Committee on
992:
Bobrayner, The view presented by editors when I came upon this article was a very negative and less than objective view of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. It is a U.S. law. Why insist on a criticism section without a section citing support. Apparently your idea of objective editing is to delete
629:
Now, mindful that with each passing day the amount of oil spewed into the Gulf increases, those obstructionist Republicans have decided that if president won’t do his job, they will do it for him. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), backed by several other senators, has introduced legislation to repeal the
342:
Yes. I believe a major implication of the act is that only US Flagged ships can be used as transportation between US ports. I.e. a "foreign" ship cannot be used to move passengers, or freight, between NY and Boston. Today (Sept 1, 2005) President Bush mentioned that they are in the processes of
599:
The Maritime Cabotage Task Force, a lobbying group representing Jones Act carriers, shipyards and dredgers, quoted the National Incident Command as saying that “no waivers of the Jones Act … have been required, because none of the foreign vessels currently operating as part of the BP Deepwater
512:
However, I think that it is worthy of mention (not a deep discussion) that the conservative press (as personified by Fox News) is calling for a waiver of the Jones Act as a tool during the clean up operations. Then link to the full article on the Oil Spill Article. That would not be a biased
1153:
This is incorrect, although there are loopholes this is not one of them, at least not this broadly. In 1893, Congress inserted into the coastwise trade statutes the language restricting foreign vessels from transporting goods “via any foreign port.” Act of Feb. 15, 1893, ch. 117, 27 Stat. 455
1082:
One of the primary, if not the primary, reason for the Jones Act is national security, yet, this aspect is not discussed. Overall the article is not balanced, but, adding a section about benefits to national security would make this article more accurate and balanced. See below for references
624:
question were foreign. Waiving the Jones Act, which would allow non-U.S.-registered vessels entrée to American waters, would jeopardize the president’s tight relationship with labor unions, who favor the Jones Act and the protections it affords their members by excluding outside competition.
1343:
It's not that "I think". This article didn't have anything about Statute of limitations before and who qualifies. How does my reference not apply when it clearly relates to the Merchant Marine Act and helps people identify who qualifies and when their claim is viable? Please explain.
704:“The Administration has the ability to grant a waiver of the Jones Act to any vessel – just as the previous Administration did during Hurricane Katrina – to allow the international community to assist in recovery efforts. Unfortunately, this Administration has not done so.
300:
477:
Pressure exerted by 21 agriculture groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, failed to secure a waiver following Hurricane Katrina. The groups contended that farmers would be harmed without additional shipping options to transport grains and
583:
McCain said the law restricts shipping and raises costs to consumers in Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and Guam. He cited a 1999 U.S. International Trade Commission Study that suggested Jones Act repeal would cut shipping costs in those markets by 22
1189:
However, what I've read about the act is that it covers only the movement of products between US ports; in fact I've read that Puerto Rico almost exclusively uses Venezuelan oil because they don't have to use Jones-Act-eligible boats to move it.
508:
There was something in the article about the current BP Oil Spill cleanup being affected by the Jones Act. It was deleted. I suspect that the addition that was deleted may very well have been biased, but I'm too tired to research it.
869:? Obviously it's easy to find politicians' comments supporting any protectionist measure - usually economically-illiterate soundbites about "support our industries ... create jobs" &c. - but it doesn't belong in an encyclopædia.
822:
i was told yesterday by a former merchant officer, that he now finds himself in the navy as a result of some provision of this act. if i recall correctly, the jimmy cagney character in 'mr. roberts' was in similar circumstances.
577:
The Arizona Republican said the 1920 law, which restricts domestic waterborne transportation to U.S.-flag, U.S.-owned ships crewed, built and owned by Americans, “hinders free trade and favors labor unions over
471:
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff temporarily waived the U.S. Shipping Act for foreign vessels carrying oil and natural gas from September 1 to September 19, 2005.
365:
This article really needs to be split up into two articles because there are two separate Jones Acts--one of which deals with ownership of U.S. Flag Vessels and the other of which deals with Seamen's Personal
389:
Not true. It's all part of the same "Merchant Marine Act of 1920". Though there is alot to the act that should be added to the article. You can read the full text (if you are into that sort of stuff) here.
1186:
That is, the implication is that only Jones-act-eligible ships can move cargo to Puerto Rico without paying additional fees -- fees greater than they would incur shipping directly to the mainland US.
711:
687:
1473:
1020:
The criticism section is not a criticism at all. The article has nothing on the cost to consumers and increased shipping costs, increased cost of gasoline, disadvantages of protectionism, etc.
1179:
I'm seeing a good deal of disagreement online about how this act applies to foreign-flagged ships arriving in Puerto Rico and was wondering if anyone could provide clarity on this issue.
114:
912:
I have removed it. This is supposed to be an encyclopædia, not a protectionist political platform. If anybody can think of a good reason to restore any of that content, please say so...
589:
He criticized the Obama administration for failing to temporarily waive the Jones Act to allow foreign-flag vessels to help with the cleanup from the BP rig explosion in the Gulf.
1316:
Seamens Rights. I believe my contribution and link is a suitable resource because it clearly states facts about the Statute of Limitations and who qualifies under the Jones Act.
131:
572:
Sen. John McCain introduced legislation to “fully repeal” the Jones Act, which he said is preventing non-U.S.-flag vessels from helping clean up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
167:
618:
the dredging operation off the Gulf coast that was a first step toward implementing protective sand berms that would protect the coastline from the encroaching oil.
1468:
1347:
The article has a quality reference about the SOL. To be clear, you are associated with the site, correct? And that is why you are trying to promote it, correct?
157:
121:
800:
use expensive US-vessels if one is available) and has to rely on the MSLC for strategic transports. American commercial shipyards are practically not existing.
1252:
I think it is very important to note that the US VI is excluded from the Jones Act. I have added that exemption to this page. However it has been deleted? --
660:
As to whether this belongs in the article, if it does, it belongs in the form of a couple paragraphs that claims were made and publicized (see, for example,
720:
1478:
1463:
1183:
goods will be transferred to an American vessel, then shipped to Puerto Rico where — again — all the rerouting costs are passed through to the consumer."
126:
312:
1321:
1488:
255:
261:
1414:
You have a link to the British Navigation Acts, but no article about the earlier US Navigation Acts. There should be an article and a link.
97:
58:
748:
The Coast Guard is claiming that the Jones Act applies only within the three-mile limit and therefore not to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
1150:"Jones Act restrictions can be circumvented by making a stop in a foreign country between two US ports, e.g., Anchorage–Vancouver–Seattle."
1421:
358:
998:
422:
381:
109:
1493:
1483:
1440:
This article seems to be increasingly skewed toward opinion, and away from neutrality. The article could use considerable clean-up.
1106:
1066:
1325:
1123:
the reference in the introduction? Same as above for this article's section on Cabotage, and the main article of the same name.
105:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
1379:
751:
But I've looked through the entire act and no phrase equivalent to "three-mile limit" (or any other number of miles) appears.
434:
clause into a full-fledged sentence. These floating clauses often make it difficult to understand what the article is saying.
33:
1209:
Where did you read that Venezulan oil is free from jones-act eligible shipping to puerto rico? I have not seen that anywhere.
826:
in any event i see no mention of such a provision in the article. an oversight? did i miss it? or was this guy blowing smoke?
554:
449:. In nearly twenty years in the maritime trades, I've never heard it referred to as anything but Jones Act. Furthermore, as
610:
John McCain Introduces Legislation to Repeal the Jones Act posted at 8:31 pm on June 24, 2010 by Howard Portnoy Reference:
391:
1236:
1036:
226:
190:
808:
1084:
994:
756:
there were rules for skimmers in the 1920 version of the act, so this provision would seem to be a later addition.
752:
749:
646:
1200:
785:
670:
779:, and conclusions, is something that Knowledge (XXG) editors are not to use in actually editing articles. --
39:
21:
775:
that says that the Coast Guard interpretation is incorrect, then feel free to include that information. But
1425:
426:
354:
230:, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
1417:
1367:
1094:
1054:
1024:
1004:
542:
369:
346:
343:
waiving it in light of Hurricane Katrina damage to US energy infrastructure. Source: personal recollection.
804:
377:
1375:
958:
CaptainWrongwayPeachfuzz, why do you keep on adding it? This content poses a serious neutrality problem.
884:
CaptainWrongwayPeachfuzz, why do you keep on adding it? This content poses a serious neutrality problem.
562:
1102:
1062:
350:
1165:
489:
410:
373:
1098:
1058:
89:
1371:
606:
vessels are needed for cleanup within domestic waters, it would not oppose waivers to the Jones Act.
1196:
963:
949:
935:
917:
903:
889:
874:
851:
831:
781:
666:
1161:
1132:
1124:
1088:
1028:
485:
406:
761:
734:
550:
524:
320:
291:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
73:
52:
1301:
1276:
1257:
1214:
1136:
1128:
1032:
442:
So, for starters, it doesn't make sense to say that " is commonly referred to as ." Also, it
1445:
1396:
1352:
1333:
304:
776:
482:
I believe the first one is the accurate one, but I'm not an expert, so I won't change it.
772:
654:
1449:
1429:
1400:
1383:
1356:
1337:
1305:
1280:
1261:
1218:
1204:
1169:
1140:
1110:
1070:
1040:
1008:
967:
953:
939:
921:
907:
893:
878:
855:
835:
812:
788:
765:
738:
673:
528:
493:
457:
430:
414:
396:
324:
1328:. There's more to selecting a reference than "I wrote it" and "I think it's on topic."
1237:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/opinion/hurricane-puerto-rico-jones-act.html?mcubz=0
959:
945:
931:
913:
899:
885:
870:
847:
827:
565:
Joseph Bonney | Jun 25, 2010 8:56PM GMT The Journal of Commerce Online - News Story
1457:
757:
730:
546:
520:
454:
393:
336:
316:
102:
1297:
1272:
1253:
1210:
446:
commonly referred to as the Jones Act, as the first page on a Google search shows
202:
184:
1085:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:7:./temp/~c113iL5jJf:e1969403:(section
1441:
1392:
1348:
1329:
661:
287:
212:
611:
218:
208:
79:
335:
Is there not a lot more to the "Jones Act" than the "sailors rights" part? -
803:
The US should get their legislation in line with international standards. --
450:
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
1364:
Incorrect, a family member is a seaman who was hurt. Had to do research.
1047:
Because the alleged cost to consumers is not established, see GAO report:
1048:
645:
The Jones Act absolutely is irrelevant to the BP oil spill: USA Today:
684:
SENATOR JOHN McCAIN INTRODUCES OPEN AMERICA’S WATER ACT June 25, 2010
453:
redirects here, there must be at least some mention of the relevance.
712:
SENATOR JOHN McCAIN INTRODUCES OPEN AMERICA’S WATER ACT June 25, 2010
688:
SENATOR JOHN McCAIN INTRODUCES OPEN AMERICA’S WATER ACT June 25, 2010
467:
Near the end of the article, there are two inconsistent paragraphs:
447:
1089:
http://www.marinelink.com/news/maritime-invest-china401119.aspx
1118:
Accurate law citation for anti-cabotage rules of the Jones Act
569:
Arizona senator cites Gulf oil spill, says law hurts consumers
231:
15:
630:
antiquated law, not just for time being but once and for all.
1083:
regarding the national security benefits of the Jones Act:
944:
Hello...? Why is this awful content still in the article?
898:
Hello...? Why is this awful content still in the article?
927:
866:
647:"GOP's false talking point: Jones Act blocks Gulf help"
516:
Stick in after the mention of the oil derrick waiver.
681:
U.S. Senate Website U.S. Senator John McCain Arizona
282:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
1474:
Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
1193:Does anyone have special insight into this issue?
1154:(current version at 46 U.S.C. § 55102(b) (2006)).
841:Citations needed in Criticism and Support Sections
260:This article has not yet received a rating on the
657:statement by a Republican senator (John McCain).
1016:Article is biased and now has no real criticism
926:CaptainWrongwayPeachfuzz, why do you keep on
679:Bogus Complaint the Open America's Water Act?
662:http://mediamatters.org/research/201006150033
600:Horizon response has required such a waiver.”
8:
1322:Knowledge (XXG):Identifying reliable sources
612:http://www.mrplc.com/kb/index.php?article=31
19:
1415:
1410:Need Article on Earlier US Navigation Acts
1365:
179:
47:
313:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
142:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
636:the Gulf and speed up their restoration.
1228:
311:Above undated message substituted from
181:
49:
1049:http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-260
1469:Low-importance United States articles
7:
1326:Knowledge (XXG):Conflict of interest
224:This article is within the scope of
95:This article is within the scope of
1271:Merge from: Coastwise_shipping_laws
234:and the subjects encompassed by it.
38:It is of interest to the following
1479:WikiProject United States articles
1464:Start-Class United States articles
1131:) 22:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC) edit by
865:Why the insistence on reinserting
296:
292:
145:Template:WikiProject United States
14:
846:clean them up in a couple weeks.
1287:
299:. Further details are available
286:
211:
201:
183:
82:
72:
51:
20:
1489:Unknown-importance law articles
563:"McCain Seeks Jones Act Repeal"
240:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Law
162:This article has been rated as
1401:21:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
1384:12:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
1357:20:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
1338:09:52, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
1281:07:49, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1262:13:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
1219:15:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1205:17:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
721:Open America’s Waters Act Bill
431:16:41, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
1:
1170:18:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
1041:18:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
1001:) 21:50 January 30,2014 UTC
879:15:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
836:15:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
664:) and are in fact untrue. --
415:18:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
1430:00:35, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
1009:21:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
968:16:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
954:22:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
940:23:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
922:17:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
397:03:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
325:03:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
1306:23:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
908:18:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
894:01:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
813:16:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
538:Posted 01:39, 30 June 2010
458:02:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
1510:
1296:. Obvious content fork. –
653:, not an editorial, nor a
438:Commonly referred to as...
262:project's importance scale
168:project's importance scale
1450:21:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
529:01:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
513:addition to the article.
494:13:46, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
361:) 19:34, 1 September 2005
259:
196:
161:
98:WikiProject United States
67:
46:
1494:WikiProject Law articles
1484:Start-Class law articles
1141:22:33, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
1111:19:17, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
1071:19:27, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
995:CaptainWrongwayPeachfuzz
987:Support Content Restored
789:22:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
766:10:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
739:01:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
674:15:36, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
463:Inconsistent information
339:19:20, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
243:Template:WikiProject Law
103:United States of America
856:14:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
384:) 05:23, 9 October 2006
148:United States articles
28:This article is rated
303:. Student editor(s):
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
861:Political commentary
90:United States portal
405:^ This is correct.
116:Articles Requested!
1436:Loss of Neutrality
1312:Disputed reference
771:If you can find a
504:Include in article
301:on the course page
34:content assessment
1432:
1420:comment added by
1386:
1370:comment added by
1248:US virgin Islands
1158:(9th Cir. 1894).
1114:
1097:comment added by
1078:National Security
1074:
1057:comment added by
1044:
1027:comment added by
805:Eingangskontrolle
777:personal research
744:Three-mile limit?
651:newspaper article
559:
545:comment added by
534:McCain statements
385:
372:comment added by
362:
349:comment added by
276:
275:
272:
271:
268:
267:
178:
177:
174:
173:
1501:
1295:
1291:
1290:
1240:
1233:
1113:
1091:
1073:
1051:
1043:
1021:
1011:
784:
669:
558:
539:
367:
344:
327:
298:
294:
290:
248:
247:
244:
241:
238:
221:
216:
215:
205:
198:
197:
187:
180:
150:
149:
146:
143:
140:
92:
87:
86:
85:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1509:
1508:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1454:
1453:
1438:
1412:
1314:
1288:
1286:
1269:
1267:MERGER PROPOSAL
1250:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1234:
1230:
1177:
1148:
1120:
1092:
1080:
1052:
1022:
1018:
1002:
989:
863:
843:
820:
797:
780:
773:reliable source
746:
665:
643:
641:Bogus complaint
540:
536:
521:Fredrik Coulter
506:
501:
465:
440:
333:
310:
293:13 January 2020
284:
245:
242:
239:
236:
235:
227:WikiProject Law
217:
210:
147:
144:
141:
138:
137:
136:
122:Become a Member
88:
83:
81:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
1507:
1505:
1497:
1496:
1491:
1486:
1481:
1476:
1471:
1466:
1456:
1455:
1437:
1434:
1411:
1408:
1406:
1404:
1403:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1341:
1313:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1268:
1265:
1249:
1246:
1242:
1241:
1227:
1226:
1222:
1197:Secretlyironic
1176:
1173:
1147:
1144:
1119:
1116:
1079:
1076:
1017:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1007:comment added
988:
985:
983:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
974:
973:
972:
971:
970:
862:
859:
842:
839:
819:
816:
796:
793:
792:
791:
782:John Broughton
745:
742:
667:John Broughton
642:
639:
638:
637:
632:
631:
626:
625:
620:
619:
608:
607:
602:
601:
596:
595:
591:
590:
586:
585:
580:
579:
574:
573:
570:
535:
532:
505:
502:
500:
497:
480:
479:
474:
473:
464:
461:
439:
436:
420:
419:
418:
417:
400:
399:
332:
329:
283:
280:
278:
274:
273:
270:
269:
266:
265:
258:
252:
251:
249:
223:
222:
206:
194:
193:
188:
176:
175:
172:
171:
164:Low-importance
160:
154:
153:
151:
135:
134:
129:
124:
119:
112:
110:Template Usage
106:
94:
93:
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1506:
1495:
1492:
1490:
1487:
1485:
1482:
1480:
1477:
1475:
1472:
1470:
1467:
1465:
1462:
1461:
1459:
1452:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1435:
1433:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1422:96.95.174.225
1419:
1409:
1407:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1358:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1345:
1342:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1294:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1266:
1264:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1247:
1238:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1207:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1191:
1187:
1184:
1180:
1174:
1172:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1145:
1143:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1130:
1126:
1117:
1115:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1096:
1090:
1086:
1077:
1075:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1050:
1045:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1015:
1010:
1006:
1000:
996:
991:
990:
986:
984:
969:
965:
961:
957:
956:
955:
951:
947:
943:
942:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
924:
923:
919:
915:
911:
910:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
895:
891:
887:
883:
882:
881:
880:
876:
872:
868:
860:
858:
857:
853:
849:
840:
838:
837:
833:
829:
824:
817:
815:
814:
810:
806:
801:
795:Protectionism
794:
790:
787:
783:
778:
774:
770:
769:
768:
767:
763:
759:
754:
750:
743:
741:
740:
736:
732:
727:
723:
722:
717:
714:
713:
708:
705:
702:
699:
696:
693:
690:
689:
685:
682:
680:
676:
675:
672:
668:
663:
658:
656:
652:
648:
640:
634:
633:
628:
627:
622:
621:
616:
615:
614:
613:
604:
603:
598:
597:
593:
592:
588:
587:
582:
581:
576:
575:
571:
568:
567:
566:
564:
560:
556:
552:
548:
544:
533:
531:
530:
526:
522:
517:
514:
510:
503:
498:
496:
495:
491:
487:
483:
476:
475:
470:
469:
468:
462:
460:
459:
456:
452:
448:
445:
437:
435:
432:
428:
424:
416:
412:
408:
404:
403:
402:
401:
398:
395:
392:
388:
387:
386:
383:
379:
375:
371:
363:
360:
356:
352:
351:66.161.59.254
348:
340:
338:
330:
328:
326:
322:
318:
314:
308:
306:
302:
289:
281:
279:
263:
257:
254:
253:
250:
233:
229:
228:
220:
214:
209:
207:
204:
200:
199:
195:
192:
189:
186:
182:
169:
165:
159:
156:
155:
152:
139:United States
133:
130:
128:
125:
123:
120:
118:
117:
113:
111:
108:
107:
104:
100:
99:
91:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
59:United States
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1439:
1416:— Preceding
1413:
1405:
1366:— Preceding
1363:
1315:
1292:
1270:
1251:
1231:
1223:
1208:
1195:
1192:
1188:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1149:
1121:
1093:— Preceding
1081:
1053:— Preceding
1046:
1023:— Preceding
1019:
982:
930:this stuff?
864:
844:
825:
821:
818:Impressment?
802:
798:
747:
728:
724:
718:
715:
709:
706:
703:
700:
697:
694:
691:
686:
683:
678:
677:
659:
655:non-reliable
650:
649:. That's a
644:
609:
561:
537:
518:
515:
511:
507:
499:BP Oil Spill
484:
481:
466:
443:
441:
423:74.4.244.107
421:
374:Rod Sullivan
364:
341:
334:
309:
285:
277:
246:law articles
225:
163:
127:Project Talk
115:
96:
40:WikiProjects
1099:Ohm monster
1059:Ohm monster
1003:—Preceding
928:reinserting
719:Reference:
710:Reference:
578:consumers.”
541:—Preceding
368:—Preceding
345:—Preceding
305:Brendorendo
232:legal field
30:Start-class
1458:Categories
1224:References
716:View Bill
297:1 May 2020
219:Law portal
1372:Drdank713
1146:Incorrect
960:bobrayner
946:bobrayner
932:bobrayner
914:bobrayner
900:bobrayner
886:bobrayner
871:bobrayner
848:Ipsherman
828:Toyokuni3
478:oilseeds.
451:Jones Act
366:Injuries.
1418:unsigned
1380:contribs
1368:unsigned
1107:contribs
1095:unsigned
1067:contribs
1055:unsigned
1037:contribs
1025:unsigned
758:Kauffner
731:Seablade
584:percent.
555:contribs
547:Seablade
543:unsigned
455:Pjbflynn
394:Pjbflynn
382:contribs
370:unsigned
359:contribs
347:unsigned
337:Marshman
331:Untitled
317:PrimeBOT
1298:wbm1058
1273:Pannam1
1254:Pannam1
1211:Pannam1
1175:Tariffs
1162:Mwroark
1133:Isaclee
1125:Isaclee
1029:Rjedgar
1005:undated
486:Kenmaze
407:Mwroark
166:on the
1442:Arllaw
1393:Arllaw
1349:Arllaw
1330:Arllaw
1087:3503)
132:Alerts
36:scale.
1446:talk
1426:talk
1397:talk
1376:talk
1353:talk
1334:talk
1324:and
1320:See
1302:talk
1293:Done
1277:talk
1258:talk
1215:talk
1201:talk
1166:talk
1137:talk
1129:talk
1103:talk
1063:talk
1033:talk
999:talk
964:talk
950:talk
936:talk
918:talk
904:talk
890:talk
875:talk
867:this
852:talk
832:talk
809:talk
786:(♫♫)
762:talk
753:This
735:talk
671:(♫♫)
551:talk
525:talk
490:talk
427:talk
411:talk
378:talk
355:talk
321:talk
295:and
315:by
256:???
237:Law
191:Law
158:Low
1460::
1448:)
1428:)
1399:)
1382:)
1378:•
1355:)
1336:)
1304:)
1279:)
1260:)
1217:)
1203:)
1168:)
1139:)
1109:)
1105:•
1069:)
1065:•
1039:)
1035:•
966:)
952:)
938:)
920:)
906:)
892:)
877:)
854:)
834:)
811:)
764:)
737:)
729:--
557:)
553:•
527:)
519:--
492:)
444:is
429:)
413:)
380:•
357:•
323:)
307:.
1444:(
1424:(
1395:(
1374:(
1351:(
1340:'
1332:(
1300:(
1275:(
1256:(
1239:)
1235:(
1213:(
1199:(
1164:(
1135:(
1127:(
1101:(
1061:(
1031:(
997:(
962:(
948:(
934:(
916:(
902:(
888:(
873:(
850:(
830:(
807:(
760:(
733:(
549:(
523:(
488:(
425:(
409:(
376:(
353:(
319:(
264:.
170:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
