Skip to the story
All stories

US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against Monterey Bay Aquarium

Judges raise First Amendment concerns over lawsuit by New England fishing groups over Seafood Watch's 2022 red list

AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made

Published Updated
US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against Monterey Bay Aquarium

What this story says

  • A US appeals court suggested it may not allow a defamation lawsuit by New England fishing groups against Monterey Bay Aquarium to proceed, citing First Amendment concerns.
  • The lawsuit centres on Seafood Watch's 2022 decision to place lobster on its 'red list' of seafood to avoid due to threats to North Atlantic right whales from fishing gear entanglement.
  • Maine's lobster industry reported 78 million pounds of catch in 2025, valued at over $460 million (US dollars) at the docks.
  • No right-rated outlet carried the story, according to the reports below.

Who covered it

Left 40%(12)Centre 57%(17)Right 3%(1)

Percentages are shares of the 30 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 3 of the 33 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured .

Trust

70/100

Craft

65/100

Hype

15/100

33 sources · methodology

Missing from the right

Only 1 of the 30 outlets with a published leaning rating that ran this story are rated right.

A reader who follows the right would not have seen this. We report the absence rather than explain it: outlets choose what to cover for many reasons, and we have no evidence about which one applies here.

A federal appeals court in Boston indicated on 26 July 2026 that it might block a defamation lawsuit brought by New England fishing industry businesses and trade groups against Monterey Bay Aquarium. The case turns on the aquarium’s Seafood Watch programme, which in 2022 placed American and Canadian lobster on its 'red list' of seafood to avoid.

Judge Seth Aframe, one of the appellate judges, said during oral arguments that the case raised concerns 'from a First Amendment perspective'. He questioned whether the lawsuit qualified as a defamation claim, stating that broadening the class of potential plaintiffs could set a precedent allowing widespread litigation.

Seafood Watch listed lobster as unsustainable due to the risk of entanglement in fishing gear to North Atlantic right whales. The lobster industry, primarily based in Maine, has argued that the listing is defamatory and has caused economic harm. Industry representatives claim that other fisheries, such as the Canadian snow crab industry, pose greater threats to the whales.

Maine fishermen landed 78 million pounds of lobster in 2025, down from recent years but still worth more than $460 million (US dollars) at the docks. The industry is a key economic and cultural driver in the state.

What the coverage left out

None of the digests or reports below mention that no right-rated outlet carried the story. None of the digests included the industry’s claim that the whales faced greater threats from other fisheries, such as the Canadian snow crab fishery, though the full reports from Washington Top News and the Associated Press did.

Coverage settled. We checked this 77 times and stopped on 10 Aug 2026, 21:01. The figures above are what it finished at.

How each side covered it

Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.

Left

12 rated outlets

  • The five left-rated digests below all led on the appeals court’s First Amendment concerns. All carried the judge’s statement that the case did not strike him as a defamation claim. All mentioned the 2022 Seafood Watch red list and the threat to North Atlantic right whales from fishing gear entanglement.
  • The Associated Press report, printed in full, also included the industry’s argument that the listing had caused economic harm and that other fisheries posed greater threats to the whales. It quoted Kevin Lipson, an attorney for the plaintiffs, who accused Monterey Bay Aquarium of hiding countervailing evidence. The report noted that major retailers, including Whole Foods, had stopped selling Gulf of Maine lobster after the red listing.

Centre

17 rated outlets

  • The four centre-rated digests all led on the appeals court’s signal that it might not allow the lawsuit to proceed due to First Amendment concerns. All mentioned the 2022 Seafood Watch red list and the industry’s claim of economic harm.
  • Washington Top News, whose full report is printed below, included the judge’s comment that the case felt troubling from a First Amendment perspective. It quoted the industry’s argument that the whales faced greater threats from other fisheries, including the Canadian snow crab fishery. The report also noted that Seafood Watch is widely cited by restaurants and stores, and that some retailers had stopped carrying Gulf of Maine lobster after the red listing.

Right

1 rated outlet

We have not written our reading of the right coverage of this story. The right-rated outlets that ran it are listed below.

Questions about this coverage

How did the left and right cover US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against…?
Of the 30 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 40% are rated left, 57% are rated centre, 3% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it, which was 33. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
Is US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against… left or right?
Neither side dominates it. Of the 30 rated outlets on this story, 40% are rated left, 57% are rated centre, 3% are rated right, and no side holds the 70% this site would want before calling a field one-sided. A story is not left or right in any case; the outlets that carried it are what carry ratings.
Is the coverage of US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against… biased?
US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against Monterey Bay Aquarium is one event reported by 33 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
Which side is not reporting US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against…?
When we first saw this story, outlets rated right had barely covered it. Coverage accretes for hours after an event, so that is where to look rather than a verdict — the split above is the current count, and it is the one to read.
Which outlets covered US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case against…?
33 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
Why did Seafood Watch place lobster on its red list?
Seafood Watch listed lobster as unsustainable in 2022 due to the threat of entanglement in fishing gear to North Atlantic right whales. The listing was based on concerns that the gear poses a critical risk to the endangered species, as acknowledged by government agencies and conservation groups.
What did the appeals court say about the defamation lawsuit?
Judge Seth Aframe of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said during oral arguments on 26 July 2026 that the case raised First Amendment concerns. He questioned whether the lawsuit qualified as a defamation claim and suggested that allowing it to proceed could set a precedent for widespread litigation.
How much lobster did Maine fishermen catch in 2025?
Maine fishermen caught over 78 million pounds of lobster in 2025, according to industry reports. The catch was valued at more than $460 million (US dollars) at the docks, though it represented a decline from recent years.
Which outlets covered the story?
The story was covered by five left-rated outlets and four centre-rated outlets, all of which led on the appeals court’s First Amendment concerns. No right-rated outlet carried the story, according to the reports below.

Read it at the source

33 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.

Left

12
Show 4 more

Centre

17
Show 9 more

Right

1

Not rated

3

How did this read?

About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.

US appeals court questions lobster industry defamation case | MediaBias News