The National Sea Grant Law Center

Blog

  • Litigation Brief: Challenging Mississippi’s Private Oyster Leasing Program

  • June 23rd, 2025 — by Siena Fouse — Category: Litigation Briefs


  • NSGLC Litigation Briefs

    Case name:
    Mississippi Commercial Fisheries United, Inc., et al. v. Mississippi Department of Marine Resources, et al.

    Date filed:
    May 1, 2025

    Court:
    Chancery Court of Harrison County Mississippi Second Judicial District

    Plaintiffs:
    Mississippi Commercial Fisheries United Inc.; Individual Oystermen

    Defendants:
    Mississippi Department of Marine Resources; Mississippi Secretary of State

    Summary of the claims:
    Plaintiffs sued the state of Mississippi for introducing private leasing of on-bottom oyster harvesting on public reefs. In 2023, the Mississippi Legislature passed a law to authorize the DMR to lease up to eighty percent of the state-owned reef permitted areas available. See MS Leg. Passes SB2544 to Expand Private Oyster Leasing. Amendments were passed in the 2024 and 2025 legislative sessions. Plaintiffs alleged that the Mississippi statutes and rule authorizing private leases for harvesting on-bottom oysters from productive natural oyster reefs violate the Mississippi Constitution as well as state procedure and responsibility.

    Plaintiffs raised multiple claims based on violation of their right to fish, vague lessee selection criteria, and the state’s responsibility for public submerged lands. Plaintiffs also challenged the DMR’s delegation of the application review process to a private third party and claimed that DMR had not followed proper rule-making procedures. Plaintiffs requested that the court grant preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting private leases of any areas of reefs of on-bottom oysters in the Mississippi Sound.

    Current status:
    Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on May 12, 2025, adding the Mississippi secretary of state as an additional defendant. On June 2nd, the state filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Next, the court must rule on the motion to dismiss. We will continue monitoring the court docket to see if any hearings are scheduled.

    Last updated 6/23/25


  • Siena Fouse
    Ocean and Coastal Law Fellow
    sjfouse@olemiss.edu













Stay Current with
Our Publications

Subscribe today to our free
quarterly publication, The SandBar
— and to our monthly newsletter,
the Ocean and Coastal Case Alert.