Fifth Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Louisiana Shrimpers’ Challenge to Federal Turtle Excluder Device Mandate
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Media Contact:
Sarah Harbison, General Counsel
The Pelican Institute for Public Policy
sarah@pelicaninstitute.org
August 4, 2026
Case centers on NOAA Fisheries’ reversal of a 30-year regulatory policy that Louisiana shrimpers say was based on the deaths of one or two turtles in North Carolina
NEW ORLEANS, La.—
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard oral argument on Tuesday, August 4, 2026, in Louisiana Shrimp Association v. Lutnick, No. 25-30408, a case challenging a 2019 federal rule that requires Louisiana’s inshore shrimpers to install Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) after more than three decades of relying on a tow-time system that federal regulators themselves had long deemed effective.
The Louisiana Shrimp Association, joined by individual shrimpers John Brown, Larry L. Helmer, Jr., and Penny V. Zar, argues that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) — part of the U.S. Department of Commerce — acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it eliminated a longstanding tow-time exemption and mandated TEDs for inshore skimmer trawlers, without identifying any new scientific data to justify the change.
“This entire regulation is based on the death of one turtle—or maybe two, the agency isn’t sure—in North Carolina. It’s the opposite of rational, reasoned decision making based on scientific evidence,” said Scott St. John, who argued the case on behalf of the Louisiana Shrimp Association.
Guesses about turtle mortality didn’t seem to be enough for the court. Judge Andrew Oldham asked the government attorney, “Can you show the work?” to underscore the point that a change in the agency’s position must be supported by scientific evidence.
“People who care about how rules are made and enjoy eating Louisiana shrimp should care about this case,” said Sarah Harbison of the Pelican Institute. “Bureaucrats in cubicles in Washington are driving up the price of shrimp, creating an opening for cheaper, foreign imports, and ending a way of life for many on the Gulf Coast. Louisianans deserve a say, and a process based on scientific evidence, when an entire industry could collapse based on a guess.”
Since 1987, NMFS had allowed inshore shrimpers to use tow-time restrictions instead of TEDs, finding that the devices were poorly suited to shallow, debris-laden bayous and marshes and that short tow times adequately protected sea turtles. In 2013, the agency expressly reaffirmed that position, citing “highly uncertain ecological benefits” weighed against the potentially significant economic harm of a TED mandate.
When NMFS reversed course in its 2019 Final Rule, it pointed to no new turtle-mortality data specific to Louisiana or the Gulf. Instead, the agency’s post-interaction mortality percentages were generated at a non-public 2015 workshop of NMFS employees in West Virginia, and ultimately traced back to a single 2010 study reporting the deaths of one or two turtles caught in North Carolina gillnets — a different fishing method than the skimmer trawls used by Louisiana shrimpers.
Louisiana’s own data went unused. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries has run a bycatch study — begun in partnership with NMFS — spanning 55 years and 128,781 trawls across offshore, inshore, and interior marsh waters, and recording only two turtle interactions in that entire period, both released alive. In 2021, Louisiana formally petitioned NMFS to reverse the TED mandate or exempt Louisiana’s state waters based on that data. NMFS has not acted on that petition in the four years since.
NMFS itself acknowledged in the 2019 rulemaking that the requirement could have significant adverse economic effects on the shrimp industry, estimating that roughly 178 part-time vessels — about 32 percent of those affected — could be forced to cease operations. Additionally, NMFS failed to account for decades of reliance interests built up by Louisiana shrimping families and the businesses that depend on them.
The Louisiana Shrimp Association is represented by Sarah Harbison and Scott St. John.
_______________
About the Pelican Institute for Public Policy
The Pelican Institute for Public Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan research institute whose mission is to research and develop policy solutions that advance individual liberty, free enterprise, and opportunity for all Louisianans. Founded in 2008, the Pelican Institute believes every Louisianan should have the opportunity to flourish in communities where good opportunities abound and economic prosperity is achievable through hard work and ingenuity. In this capacity, Pelican has conducted extensive research on Louisiana’s coastal litigation. Learn more about Pelican at pelicanpolicy.org.
###
