46 U.S.C. § 70503

Prohibited acts

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 46 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Prohibitions.—An individual may not knowingly or intentionally—(1) manufacture or distribute, possess with intent to manufacture or distribute, or place or cause to be placed with intent to manufacture or distribute a controlled substance on board a covered vessel;(2) destroy (including jettisoning any item or scuttling, burning, or hastily cleaning a vessel), or attempt or conspire to destroy, property that is subject to forfeiture under section 511(a) of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 881(a)) on board a covered vessel; or(3) conceal, or attempt or conspire to conceal, more than $100,000 in currency or other monetary instruments on the person of such individual while on board a covered vessel or in any conveyance, article of luggage, merchandise, or other container, or compartment of or aboard the covered vessel if that vessel is outfitted for smuggling.(b)Extension Beyond Territorial Jurisdiction.—Subsection (a) applies even though the act is committed outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.(c)Nonapplication.—(1)In general.—Subject to paragraph (2), subsection (a) does not apply to—(A) a common or contract carrier or an employee of the carrier who possesses or distributes a controlled substance in the lawful and usual course of the carrier’s business; or(B) a public vessel of the United States or an individual on board the vessel who possesses or distributes a controlled substance in the lawful course of the individual’s duties.(2)Entered in manifest.—Paragraph (1) applies only if the controlled substance is part of the cargo entered in the vessel’s manifest and is intended to be imported lawfully into the country of destination for scientific, medical, or other lawful purposes.(d)Burden of Proof.—The United States Government is not required to negative a defense provided by subsection (c) in a complaint, information, indictment, or other pleading or in a trial or other proceeding. The burden of going forward with the evidence supporting the defense is on the person claiming its benefit.(e)Covered Vessel Defined.—In this section the term “covered vessel” means—(1) a vessel of the United States or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; or(2) any other vessel if the individual is a citizen of the United States or a resident alien of the United States.(Pub. L. 109–304, § 10(2), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1687; Pub. L. 114–120, title III, § 314(a), (b), (e)(1), Feb. 8, 2016, 130 Stat. 59; Pub. L. 119–60, div. G, title LXXIII, § 7324, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 1770.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised Section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
70503(a)	46 App.:1903(a).	Pub. L. 96–350, § 3(a), (e), (h), Sept. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 1160; Pub. L. 99–570, title III, § 3202, Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3207–95, 3207–96, 3207–97; Pub. L. 99–640, § 17, Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3552, 3554; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7402(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4483.
70503(b)	46 App.:1903(h).
70503(c)	46 App.:1903(e) (1st sentence).
70503(d)	46 App.:1903(e) (last sentence).

In subsection (a), before paragraph (1), the words “may not” are substituted for “It is unlawful for” for consistency in the revised title and to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (b), the words “applies to” are substituted for “is intended to reach” for clarity and to eliminate unnecessary words.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2025—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7324(1), substituted “An” for “While on board a covered vessel, an” in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7324(2), amended par. (1) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (1) read as follows: “manufacture or distribute, or possess with intent to manufacture or distribute, a controlled substance;”.

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7324(3), inserted “on board a covered vessel” after “(21 U.S.C. 881(a))”.

Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 119–60, § 7324(4), inserted “while on board a covered vessel” after “such individual”.

2016—Pub. L. 114–120, § 314(e)(1), substituted “Prohibited acts” for “Manufacture, distribution, or possession of controlled substances on vessels” in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 114–120, § 314(a), amended subsec. (a) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “An individual may not knowingly or intentionally manufacture or distribute, or possess with intent to manufacture or distribute, a controlled substance on board—

“(1) a vessel of the United States or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; or

“(2) any vessel if the individual is a citizen of the United States or a resident alien of the United States.”

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 114–120, § 314(b), added subsec. (e).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 379 cases (154 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: United States v. Vilches-Navarrete

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Vilches-Navarrete (2008) ca1 · cites it 10× “[1] Appellant Luis Segundo Vilches-Navarrete ("Vilches") was convicted of: (1) possession *5 with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act ("MDLEA"), 46 U.S.C. § 70503 ; [2] and (2) conspiracy to possess with…”

United States v. Mario Wilchcombe (2016) ca11 · cites it 5× “jurisdiction, in violation of 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503 (a) and (b) and 70506(a), 21 U.”

United States v. Carlington Cruickshank (2016) ca11 · cites it 3× “§ 960 (b)(1)(B)(ii) and 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503 (a), 70506(a) and (b), and one count of aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine while aboard a vessel, in violation of 18 U.”

United States v. Alfredo Mosquera-Murillo (2018) cadc · cites it 9× “The government's theory as to each defendant's involvement was as follows: that Chang-Rendon (a civilian employee of the Colombian Navy) knew the patrol routes of Colombian and American law-enforcement vessels and passed that information along to Mosquera-Murillo; that…”

United States v. Prado (2019) ca2 · cites it 6× “DISCUSSION Notwithstanding their having pleaded guilty, the defendants contend their convictions should be overturned, and the indictment dismissed, because the government failed to show that the go-fast was stateless and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, as…”

United States v. Matos-Luchi (2010) ca1 · cites it 8× “The defendants were charged by indictment with violations of the MDLEA: one count of possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute, 46 U.S.C. § 70503 , and one count of aiding and abetting that crime, 18 U.”

United States v. Cardales-Luna (2011) ca1 · cites it 8× “Cardales-Luna and his seven fellow crew members were subsequently charged in a three-count superseding indictment with (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute the drugs found on the Osiris II, see 46 U.”

United States v. Javier Ballestas (2015) cadc · cites it 5× “46 U.S.C. §§ 70503 (a), 70506(b). He reserved the right to bring an appeal on certain issues, including whether the MDLEA’s conspiracy provision reaches extraterritorially to encompass his charged conduct in Colombia, and whether the application of the MDLEA against him violates…”

United States v. Trinity Rolando Cabezas-Montano (2020) ca11 · cites it 2× “§ 70506 (b), and possession with intent to distribute over five kilograms of cocaine while on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 70503 (a)(1). As to their convictions, the defendants, either together or separately,…”

United States v. Roger Anchundia-Espinoza (2018) ca5 · cites it 4× “EDITH BROWN CLEMENT, Circuit Judge: Roger Alfredo Anchundia-Espinoza pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess, with the intent to distribute, cocaine while aboard a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, in violation of 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503 (a)(1), 70506(a) & (b)…”

United States v. Valderrama Carvajal (2013) dcd · cites it 9× “Munoz Miranda and Valderrama Carvajal were charged by Indictment filed April 23, 2010 with conspiracy to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in violation of the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA),…”

Wilson Daniel Winthrop-Redin v. United States (2014) ca11 · cites it 2× “§ 960 (b)(l)(B)(ii); 46 U.S.C. §§ 70503 (a), 70506(a)-(b), as well as (2) possessing with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, 21 U.”

Show all 379 citing cases →

— 46 U.S.C. § 70503(a)(1) — 2 cases

United States v. Jhon Yandry Quijije-Mero (2025) ca11

United States v. Wilfredo Robles (2025) ca11

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.