Maine Lobster, Inc. v. Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Maine

Date Filed: March 6, 2025

Background: The Monterey Bay Aquarium Foundation in California published a 2022 report on the risks to an endangered whale species posed by North American lobster fishing practices. The Foundation recommended that consumers avoid this lobster based on concerns that North Atlantic right whales are vulnerable to entanglement in lobster fishing gear.

Some retailers stopped selling Maine lobster. In March 2023, a coalition of Maine lobstering groups sued the Foundation for defamation, alleging that its report is based on bad science and has caused them significant economic losses.

The Foundation asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing, in part, that the claims can’t proceed because the allegedly defamatory statements were about a large, amorphous group and were not “of and concerning” any of the specific plaintiffs. The Foundation also argued that its challenged statements are constitutionally protected opinion informed by scientific facts, which were disclosed to readers.  

The district court denied the Foundation’s motion to dismiss. The court concluded that, though the report didn’t single out any one of the 5,600 people who fish for lobster in Maine alone, it still implicated, and was therefore “of and concerning,” each member of the group. It also rejected that this advocacy report was non-actionable opinion.

The Foundation asked the district court for permission to immediately appeal its decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.   

Our Position: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, joined by the New England First Amendment Coalition, the Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, and the Maine Pro Chapter of the Society for Professional Journalists, filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the district court to grant the Foundation’s request to appeal the ruling.

• The unprecedented application here of the rule that ordinarily prevents large groups from making libel claims threatens news reporting.

• Commentary on a matter of scientific debate should be non-actionable opinion.

From the Brief: “Because the protections against group libel and for opinion enable public interest journalism, the decision raises significant concerns for the press, and without immediate appellate review, risks chilling swaths of reporting and commentary.”

Update: On April 15, 2025, the district court granted the Foundation’s motion to certify the defamation law issues to the First Circuit.