In mid-February the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine denied a motion by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed against it by members of the Maine lobster industry. The lawsuit challenges the Aquarium’s “red listing” for American lobster, which plaintiffs argue defamed the fishery’s reputation for sustainability and caused severe economic harm to Maine’s historic lobster industry.
The court rejected the Aquarium’s arguments to dismiss the case on jurisdictional and procedural grounds, affirming that the lawsuit has merit, was properly filed in Maine, and plaintiffs presented sufficient facts to support their claims and request for injunctive relief.
“This ruling is a crucial step in holding the Monterey Bay Aquarium accountable for misleading statements that have unfairly targeted our industry,” said Patrice McCarron, executive director of the Maine Lobstermen’s Association (MLA). “Maine lobstermen have been stewards of the ocean for generations, and we are committed to defending our livelihood against baseless claims.”
The lawsuit stems from the Aquarium’s 2022 decision to assign American lobster a “red” rating, advising consumers and businesses to avoid purchasing it due to alleged risks to the North Atlantic right whale. This decision led consumers to believe that Maine lobstermen do not use sustainable fishing practices and resulted in a loss of customers, including Whole Foods, which announced in November 2022 that it would stop buying Maine lobster. The plaintiffs argue that the Aquarium misrepresented scientific data and disregarded decades of successful conservation efforts undertaken by lobstermen. The Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation argued that it has a right to make its rating based on Maine’s free speech laws. But U.S. District Judge John Woodcock disagreed.
The ruling only addresses the request for dismissal, but it might provide some insight into how the lawsuit could proceed. In his ruling Judge Woodcock wrote that the Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation claimed the lobster advisory is based on “tentative scientific conclusions,” but the watch list can easily be perceived as “conveying verifiable facts.” “[The Aquarium] cannot have it both ways,” Woodcock said. With the court’s decision, the case will now move forward to discovery and trial proceedings.
コメント