U.S. Code » Title 22 » Chapter CHAPTER 9— FOREIGN WARS, WAR MATERIALS, AND NEUTRALITY › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— WAR MATERIALS

22 U.S.C. § 401

Illegal exportation of war materials

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Seizure and forfeiture of materials and carriers

Whenever an attempt is made to export or ship from or take out of the United States any arms or munitions of war or other articles in violation of law, or whenever it is known or there shall be probable cause to believe that any arms or munitions of war or other articles are intended to be or are being or have been exported or removed from the United States in violation of law, the Secretary of the Treasury, or any person duly authorized for the purpose by the President, may seize and detain such arms or munitions of war or other articles and may seize and detain any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft containing the same or which has been or is being used in exporting or attempting to export such arms or munitions of war or other articles. The Secretary of Commerce may seize and detain any commodity (other than arms or munitions of war) or technology which is intended to be or is being exported in violation of laws governing such exports and may seize and detain any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft containing the same or which has been used or is being used in exporting or attempting to export such articles. All arms or munitions of war and other articles, vessels, vehicles, and aircraft seized pursuant to this subsection shall be forfeited.

(b) Applicability of laws relating to seizure, forfeiture, and condemnation

All provisions of law relating to seizure, summary and judicial forfeiture and condemnation for violation of the customs laws, the disposition of the property forfeited or condemned or the proceeds from the sale thereof; the remission or mitigation of such forfeitures; and the compromise of claims and the award of compensation to informers in respect of such forfeitures shall apply to seizures and forfeitures incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, under the provisions of this section, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions hereof. However, with respect to seizures and forfeitures of property under this section by the Secretary of Commerce, such duties as are imposed upon the customs officer or any other person with respect to the seizure and forfeiture of property under the customs law may be performed by such officers as are designated by the Secretary of Commerce or, upon the request of the Secretary of Commerce, by any other agency that has authority to manage and dispose of seized property. Awards of compensation to informers under this section may be paid only out of funds specifically appropriated therefor.

(c) Disposition of forfeited materials

Arms and munitions of war forfeited under subsection (b) of this section shall be delivered to the Secretary of Defense for such use or disposition as he may deem in the public interest, or, in the event that the Secretary of Defense refuses to accept such arms and munitions of war, they shall be sold or otherwise disposed of as prescribed under existing law in the case of forfeitures for violation of the customs laws.

(June 15, 1917, ch. 30, title VI, § 1, 40 Stat. 223; June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title IV, § 523, 46 Stat. 740; Aug. 13, 1953, ch. 434, § 1, 67 Stat. 577; Pub. L. 105–119, title II, § 211(a), Nov. 26, 1997, 111 Stat. 2487.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1997—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105–119, which directed the amendment of section 401 of title 22, United States Code, by inserting “The Secretary of Commerce may seize and detain any commodity (other than arms or munitions of war) or technology which is intended to be or is being exported in violation of laws governing such exports and may seize and detain any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft containing the same or which has been used or is being used in exporting or attempting to export such articles.” after first sentence in subsec. (a), was executed by making the insertion in section 1(a) of act June 15, 1917, ch. 30, which is classified to this section, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 105–119, which directed the amendment of section 401 of title 22, United States Code, by inserting “However, with respect to seizures and forfeitures of property under this section by the Secretary of Commerce, such duties as are imposed upon the customs officer or any other person with respect to the seizure and forfeiture of property under the customs law may be performed by such officers as are designated by the Secretary of Commerce or, upon the request of the Secretary of Commerce, by any other agency that has authority to manage and dispose of seized property.” after “and not inconsistent with the provisions hereof.” in subsec. (b), was executed by making the insertion in section 1(b) of act June 15, 1917, ch. 30, which is classified to this section, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

1953—Act Aug. 13, 1953, provided not only seizure and forfeiture of articles or merchandise which are being, or are intended to be illegally exported, and the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft in which exportation is intended to accomplish, but also for the seizure and forfeiture of articles or merchandise actually illegally exported out, the carrier used to effectuate the exportation, provided for applicability of laws relating to seizure, summary and judicial forfeiture and condemnation, and provided for the disposition of seized materials.

1930—Act June 17, 1930, substituted “comptrollers of customs” for “Naval officers of customs”.

Executive DocumentsEx. Ord. No. 10863. Authorization of Attorney General To Seize Arms and Munitions of War, and Other Articles

Ex. Ord. No. 10863, Feb. 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 1507, provided:

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 1 of Title VI of the act of June 15, 1917, 40 Stat. 223, as amended by section 1 of the act of August 13, 1953, 67 Stat. 577 (22 U.S.C. 401), it is ordered as follows:

Section 1. The Attorney General is hereby designated under section 1 of Title VI of the act of June 15, 1917, as amended by section 1 of the act of August 13, 1953 [this section], as a person duly authorized to seize and detain arms or munitions of war or other articles, and to seize and detain any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft containing such items or which has been, or is being, used in exporting or attempting to export such arms or munitions of war or other articles, whenever an attempt is made to export or ship from or take out of the United States such arms or munitions of war or other articles in violation of law, or whenever it is known, or there is probable cause to believe, that such arms or munitions of war or other articles are intended to be, or are being or have been, exported or removed from the United States in violation of law.

Sec. 2. The authority conferred upon the Attorney General by section 1 of this order may be exercised by any officer of the Department of Justice designated for such purpose by the Attorney General.

Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases, 1945–2020 · leading case: Gerardo Serrano v. U.S. Customs & Border, 975 F.3d 488 (5th Cir. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gerardo Serrano v. U.S. Customs & Border, 975 F.3d 488 (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “§ 1595a(d), 22 U.S.C. § 401 , 22 U.S.C. § 2778 , and 22 C.”
United States v. Twenty Miljam-350 IED Jammers, 669 F.3d 78 (2d Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “Kaplan, Judge, ordering the forfeiture to plaintiff United States, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 401 (a), of certain communication-jamming devices, to wit, the defendant-m-rem Twenty Miljam-350 IED Jammers (the “Jammers”), owned by Wallach and a company of which he was the majority…”
United States v. George Whiting, & Theodore Whiting, 781 F.2d 692 (9th Cir. 1986). · cites it 3× “-8(b)(6) provides: “The customs office is authorized under [ 22 U.S.C. § 401 11 ] to seize and detain any commodities [exported or suspected of being exported in violation of the EAA].”
United States v. Odutayo, 406 F.3d 386 (5th Cir. 2005). · cites it 3× “Statutory authority provided under 22 U.S.C. § 401 . Inspector Taylor acted under the authority of 22 U.”
United States v. Sierra-Garcia, 760 F. Supp. 252 (E.D.N.Y 1991). · cites it 5× “That extension of the border search doctrine to persons or things leaving the country is also reflected in at least two statutes, namely, 22 U.S.C. § 401 and 31 U.S.C. *266 § 5317.”
Alde, S.A. v. United States, 28 Fed. Cl. 26 (Fed. Cl. 1993). · cites it 3× “In the affidavit attached to the Customs Service’s application for the warrant, agent Roberto Jusino stated that plaintiff’s aircraft had been seized previously for landing rights violations and was suspected of violating United States Export Declaration laws, in particular, 22…”
Winters v. Working, 510 F. Supp. 14 (W.D. Tex. 1980). · cites it 4× “He sought to recover the value of a pickup truck that had been seized by Customs officials under 22 U.S.C. § 401 and summarily forfeited in administrative proceedings pursuant to 19 U.”
United States v. One 1985 Mercedes-Benz, 300 Sd, Vin Wdbcb20c6fa177831, & Sadrudin Kabani, Claimant-Appellant, 14 F.3d 465 (9th Cir. 1994). · cites it 5× “1 The issue is whether a car used to export currency in violation of Section 5316’s reporting requirements may be forfeited under the Espionage Act, 22 U.S.C. § 401 (1988), which provides for the forfeiture of vehicles used in exporting “any arms or munitions of war or other…”
Sam Rubin v. United States, 289 F.2d 195 (5th Cir. 1961). · cites it 6× “This appeal is from a judgment under 22 U.S.C.A. § 401 , as amended August 13, 1953, 67 Stat.”
United States v. Portrait of Wally, 663 F. Supp. 2d 232 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). · cites it 2× “§ 1595 (a) (c), and 22 U.S.C. § 401 (a). All parties now move for summary judgment.”
Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct. 11 (Ct. Cl. 1989). · cites it 3× “As a result, the Customs Service seized the shipment, citing 22 U.S.C. § 401 , 1 which authorizes the Customs Service to seize articles that are being exported “in violation of the law.”
United States of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee-Appellant v. One Boeing 707 Aircraft, Etc., Servotech Int'l Establishment, 750 F.2d 1280 (5th Cir. 1985). · cites it 4× “The basis of this civil forfeiture action is 22 U.S.C. § 401 which prohibits the illegal exportation of war materials.”
Show all 62 citing cases →
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.