19 U.S.C. § 1307
Convict-made goods; importation prohibited
All goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign country by convict labor or/and forced labor or/and indentured labor under penal sanctions shall not be entitled to entry at any of the ports of the United States, and the importation thereof is hereby prohibited, and the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary for the enforcement of this provision.
“Forced labor”, as herein used, shall mean all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty for its nonperformance and for which the worker does not offer himself voluntarily. For purposes of this section, the term “forced labor or/and indentured labor” includes forced or indentured child labor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Tomasella v. The Hershey Co., 962 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2020).
Tomasella v. The Hershey Co., 962 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2020). “o the central pleasure-providing characteristic of the product, which is undermined by undisclosed child and slave labor," and that Defendants "create[] an implied but false impression in the mind of a reasonable consumer" that their for-sale chocolate products are in the…”
China Diesel Imports, Inc. v. United States, 855 F. Supp. 380 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994). “See 19 U.S.C. § 1307 (1988). Both CDI and Customs move for summary judgment on the issue of whether Customs correctly determined that the class of diesel engines in question was the product of forced or convict labor and therefore properly prohibited entry into the United States.”
Ninestar Corp. v. United States, 2024 CIT 24 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2024). “590 , 689–90 (as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1307 ) (“Section 307”). The FLETF’s addition of Ninestar to the Entity List of the UFLPA presumptively prohibits, under section 307, the importation into the United States of any goods produced by Ninestar.”
Int'l Labor Rights Fund v. United States, 391 F. Supp. 2d 1370 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005). “42 , credible allegations that cocoa imported to the United States from Cote d’Ivoire 1 is produced by forced child labor; 2) require cocoa importers to show that their imports are not the product of forced child labor; and 3) prohibit the importation of merchandise that is…”
United States v. Ven-Fuel, Inc., 758 F.2d 741 (1st Cir. 1985). “, 19 U.S.C. § 1307 (entry of imports manufactured by slave labor barred), it is entirely baseless.”
Ninestar Corp. v. United States, 2023 CIT 169 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). “See 19 U.S.C. § 1307 . The FLETF’s decision to add Plaintiffs to the Entity List of the UFLPA presumptively prohibits, under section 307, the importation of any goods produced by Plaintiffs.”
Int'l Labor Rights Fund v. Bush, 357 F. Supp. 2d 204 (D.D.C. 2004). “, and section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1307 (“Section 307”), the actions of the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection with regard to cocoa imported to the United States from Cote d’Ivoire.”
Made in the USA Found. v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 252 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “Plain *254 tiffs also seek a declaratory judgment that two statutory provisions apply to Department of Defense purchases for retail purposes by military exchanges: the statutory ban on the importation of products made by convicts, 19 U.”
Associated Imports, Inc. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, AFL-CIO, 609 F. Supp. 595 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). “The Tariff Act of 1930, specifically 19 U.S.C. § 1307 , bars the entry into American ports of goods manufactured by “forced” labor, which is defined by the statute as that labor which is not performed voluntarily and is exacted under threat of punishment.”
McKinney v. United States Dep't of the Treasury, 614 F. Supp. 1226 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1985). “te Department report and congressional and public concern, sought approval from the Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary) to publish in the Federal Register a finding that certain products from the Soviet Union may be produced by forced labor making them ineligible for entry…”
China Diesel Imports, Inc. v. United States, 870 F. Supp. 347 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994). “See 19 U.S.C. § 1307 . Evidence established that a small diesel engine market has existed for at least the past decade, and it is served by merchandise at a variety of prices.”
Native Fed'n of the Madre De Dios River v. Bozovich Timber Prods., Inc., 491 F. Supp. 2d 1174 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007). “2d 1370, 1371 (2005) (Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1307 (2002), 13 prohibited importation of merchandise produced by forced labor, except where domestic consumption is greater than domestic production); Florsheim Shoe Co.”
Mugworld, Inc. v. G.G. Marck & Assocs., Inc., 563 F. Supp. 2d 659 (E.D. Tex. 2007). “19 U.S.C.A. § 1307 (prohibition on forced-labor goods does not apply to “goods, wares, articles, or merchandise so mined, produced, or manufactured which are not mined, produced, or manufactured in such quantities in the United States as to meet the consumptive demands of the…”
Int'l Rights Advocates v. Mayorkas, 2024 CIT 91 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2024). “OPINION AND ORDER [Dismissing for lack of jurisdiction plaintiff’s action to compel defendants to issue decision on allegations of cocoa imported through forced child labor from the Ivory Coast in violation of 19 U.S.C. § 1307 .] Dated: August 8, 2024 Terrence P.”
McKinney v. United States Dep't of the Treasury, 799 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1986). “19 U.S.C. § 1307 (1982). . For purposes of the opinion no distinction is drawn between convict labor, forced labor, or indentured labor, herein referred to as "forced labor.”
S. Cross Seafoods, LLC v. United States, 2023 CIT 171 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). “2d at 207 (holding that the language of 19 U.S.C. § 1307 , stating that goods produced by forced labor and “importation thereof is hereby prohibited,” constituted embargo language conferring jurisdiction on this Court) (emphasis supplied).”
Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L. v. United States, 2025 CIT 125 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2025). “§ 1581 (i) because 19 U.S.C § 1307 is a “law of the United States providing for .”
Allied Int'l, Inc. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, AFL-CIO, 554 F. Supp. 32 (D. Mass. 1982). “Defendants’ final contention is that they should be entitled to litigate their defense that Allied’s imports are the product of slave or forced labor within the meaning of § 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.”
Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L. v. United States, 2025 CIT 151 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2025). “(“plaintiff,” or “Kingtom”) engaged in forced labor practices pursuant to section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C § 1307. 1 Compl. ¶ 1, ECF No. 5; Notice of Finding That Aluminum Extrusions and Profile Products and Derivatives Produced or Manufactured Wholly…”
Int'l Rights Advocates v. Mullin (Fed. Cir. 2026). “BACKGROUND I Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, codified at 19 U.S.C. § 1307 , prohibits the admission of goods into the United States that have been produced, in whole or in part, using forced, indentured, or convict labor.”
FedEx Trade Networks Transp. & Brokerage, Inc. v. Airboss Def. Grp., LLC (D. Maryland 2024). “Indemnified Party will give such Indemnitor reasonably prompt written notice thereof, but in any event, not later than ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such notice of such Third Party 8 In its response in opposition to ADG’s motion to dismiss, McWilliams Collective states…”
Ninestar Corp. v. United States, 2024 CIT 76 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2024). “590 , 689–90 (as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1307 ) (“Section 307”). The FLETF’s addition of Ninestar to the Entity List of the UFLPA presumptively prohibits, under section 307, the importation into the United States of any goods produced by Ninestar.”
Smart Apparel US Inc v. Nordstrom Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). “§ 9241 (a); see also 19 U.S.C. § 1307 ; 19 C.F.R. §§ 12.42-12.”
Mia v. Kimberly Clark Corp. (D.D.C. 2025). “¶¶ 33 , 36 (citing 19 U.S.C. § 1307 ). CBP stated that it had identified “information that reasonably indicates the use of forced labor in [Brightway’s] manufacturing operations” and directed “[CBP] personnel at all U.”
Mugworld, Inc. v. Gg Marck & Assocs., Inc., 563 F. Supp. 2d 654 (E.D. Tex. 2007). “19 U.S.C.A. § 1307 (prohibition on forced-labor goods does not apply to "goods, wares, articles, or merchandise so mined, produced, or manufactured which are not mined, produced, or manufactured in such quantities in the United States as to meet the consumptive demands of the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.