Ex parte United States

Background

Three collision cases involved vessels that were owned or taken into service by the United States during and after World War I. The Western Maid, Liberty, and Carolinian were assigned to federal agencies, manned by naval or army crews, and engaged in government relief or transport duties when collisions occurred. Each collision happened while the ships were in U.S. possession; later the ships were returned to private hands and lawsuits were filed in federal district courts seeking in rem maritime relief against the vessels.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether a District Court can proceed in rem against a vessel for a collision that happened while the ship belonged to the United States and served public purposes. The opinion explains that maritime law in this country exists only by U.S. adoption and that the United States has not consented to be sued for torts committed while operating government property. The Court held that the 1916 and 1920 statutes do not retroactively create liability when none existed before. Because the sovereign did not waive immunity for such torts, the vessels could not be subjected to in rem proceedings based on those wartime collisions, and the Court granted writs of prohibition to stop the lower courts from exercising jurisdiction.

Real world impact

The decision prevents parties from seizing or enforcing maritime claims against ships for collisions that occurred during government service, and it holds that later statutes did not make the United States retroactively liable for those torts. Claimants therefore face limited remedies for harms that occurred while a vessel was government-controlled.

Dissents or concurrances

A separate opinion argued the opposite, saying admiralty tradition treats the ship itself as the wrongdoer and that earlier cases allow claims to be enforced once the vessel leaves government hands; that view urged following established admiralty precedents.