What’s in it for them?,

1. It controls what law applies aboard ship when they are in international waters.

2. I have heard that there is some concern in some quarters that flying a US flag makes a ship a bigger target for pirates / terrorists.

3. Check this out: http://www.cybercruises.com/cm_mar14-a-look-at-cruise-ship-registry.htm According to this, the first US based cruise line to fly a flag of convenience did so to avoid prohibition (so they could serve alcohol aboard ship).

I wish to note that The Federal Maritime Commission also does not have authority over US ports, so that they have “no authority over: passenger line vessel operations, safety issues, amenities onboard vessels or fare levels.” does not preclude the possibility that other federal (or state or local) agencies do not have the authority to bar non-compliant ships from US ports.

Several things to consider:

Many cruise line companies deem that the regulations which follow registration under the U.S. flag are unattractive, therefore they lean towards a country which has regulations and laws which benefit the company and its operation. Some claim that the corporations which sail under a foreign flag do so simply to avoid the American safety and consumer protection regulations and laws. The Federal Maritime Commission also understands and acknowledges this fact by giving the following statement “it is important to know that the Commission has no authority over: passenger line vessel operations, safety issues, amenities onboard vessels or fare levels.”

source: http://crew-center.com/why-cruise-ships-sail-under-foreign-flag%E2%80%99s

I would say that means that at least one Federal agency (if not the whole Federal government) admits it does not have the authority to oversee design and construction of cruise ships. One would think that design would include ADA compliant rooms / vessels.

There is another paper on the issue found here: http://www.cruiseresearch.org/Legal%20Issues%20Relevant%20to%20Cruise%20Ships.html

In it, author Caitlin E. Burke writes of a case where an ADA claim was made against a cruise line and the agreed to forum in which the case was to be heard:

Another instance where the forum-selection clause was not enforced is in the case of Walker v. Carnival Cruise Lines (2008). Walker purchased a cruise ticket from a travel agent who had assured him (along with the cruise line) that both his room and the cruise ship would be disabled accessible. After boarding, he found that neither his room nor the ship itself was in compliance with the ADA (American Disabilities Act, 1990). The court first dismissed the claim and moved the case from California to Florida, on account of the forum-selection clause. Later, the court decided not to enforce the forum-selection clause for two reasons. “First, the plaintiffs’ physical disabilities and economic constraints were so severe that, in combination, they would preclude plaintiffs from having their day in court. Second, was the fact that the plaintiffs were seeking to vindicate important civil rights”(Dickerson, 2004, p. 492).

I read that to say that the court didn’t like the contract and decided to void the law.

When judges void the law, it is no wonder why the DOJ feels the authority to do so as well.

It would not surprise me that the DOJ threatened the Florida based Carnival Cruise lines with all sorts of investigations which would cost the company a great deal of money – far more than the fine and design changes the company agreed to make to their ships.

(And given the tone of the DOJ press release, I believe that the threats are exactly what happened.)

One a side note, there is an article in the September issue of “Yachts Internatio0nal” on the obstructions facing yacht owners who wish to flag their yachts under an American flag.

The article cites the case of the M/Y Limitless, whose designer wrote and got through the US Congress a private bill allowing the yacht to be American flagged. Other yachts have taken the same path. (The author says as far as he knows, all but one yacht with an American flagging has taken that path.)

The money quote from the article reads:

Thus, American owners have four options for flagging a large yacht: an Act of Congress, equivalent compliance, tonnage reduction or foreign flag of convenience.

“Overlawyered” indeed.

“Is there a simple legal reason?”

2 simple reasons:

1 It’s a US corporation, so the DOJ has jurisdiction over the corporation regardless of what flag the ships fly.

2 Even if a ship flies a foreign flag, the US government can prohibit it from docking in US ports if it is not in compliance with US laws.

Most American-based shipping lines register their vessels in other countries. Apparently they care.

I thought I was asking a simple question: I don’t understand how DOJ has jurisdiction.

Is there a simple legal reason?

I think some enterprising law professor could take the opportunity to teach an administrative law course based on the actions of the Obama administrations’: legislating by executive order, refusal to enforce immigration and other laws, and various end runs around the rulemaking process, etc.

In fact, it might be the very first interesting administrative law course in law school history.

Who cares where the ship is registered? If the cruise begins and ends at an American port, the company is obviously doing business in America. It’s not like they wait until they’re in international waters to make the ship noncompliant.

But, noncompliant with what? According to the article, the DOJ is enforcing rules that haven’t even been adopted yet, for both the physical cruise ship and the Internet site.