The MARITIME Act directs the Secretary of State, within 120 days of enactment, to submit a Congress-facing report on the United States’ efforts to promote policies that address the effects of sea level rise on statehood and maritime zones. The report must review ongoing initiatives, identify barriers to policy adoption, and name foreign countries and international organizations that have adopted related policies.
The bill frames this work as part of a broader U.S. commitment to preserving statehood and the legitimacy of maritime zones in line with international law.
Why it matters: coastal and island states face rising sea levels that could threaten political status and access to marine rights. A formal U.S. policy and reporting effort signals a coordinated diplomatic approach to protect statehood and maritime entitlements, anchored in UNCLOS principles, while encouraging compatible actions abroad.
At a Glance
What It Does
Not later than 120 days after enactment, the Secretary of State, with heads of other relevant federal agencies, must submit a report to Congress on U.S. efforts to promote policies that mitigate sea level rise effects on statehood and maritime zones.
Who It Affects
This directly involves the State Department, other federal agencies, foreign governments, international organizations, and coastal states whose baselines and maritime zones are affected by sea level rise.
Why It Matters
It codifies a coordinated diplomatic approach to protecting statehood and maritime rights, aligning U.S. policy with international law and setting a framework for multilateral engagement.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The MARITIME Act seeks to lock in a structured U.S. approach to a potentially destabilizing climate-driven issue: sea level rise and its impact on how we define statehood and maritime zones. The bill starts by embedding a clear short title and policy direction that emphasizes preserving existing baselines and maritime entitlements under international law, particularly UNCLOS.
It then requires a concrete reporting mechanism: within 120 days of enactment, the Secretary of State, in collaboration with other federal agencies, must deliver an unclassified report (with a possible classified annex) to Congress detailing the United States’ efforts to promote compatible policies in other countries and international organizations. The report’s contents include a comprehensive review of initiatives, an assessment of barriers to adoption, and a catalog of countries and organizations that have already adopted related policies.
The intent is to provide a rigorous, interagency, international-policy orientation for diplomacy around sea level rise, statehood, and maritime rights. The report will be submitted to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
The bill further states that the United States should push for baselines and maritime zones to remain legitimate and intact under international law as reflected in UNCLOS, even as sea level rise occurs, and to encourage similar policies abroad. Overall, the MARITIME Act creates a formal process to coordinate policy development, diplomacy, and information-sharing on one of the most consequential geopolitical questions of climate change for small island and coastal states.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires a Secretary of State report within 120 days of enactment.
The report must be unclassified, with a possible classified annex.
It calls for a comprehensive review of DOS initiatives and other agencies’ efforts.
It assesses barriers to promoting the described policies.
It identifies countries and international organizations that have adopted related policies.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title and citation
This section establishes the Act's short title as the MARITIME Act (Maintaining Area Rights and Integrity Through International Maritime Enforcement Act) and provides the citation framework for the legislation.
Findings
Section 2 articulates congressional findings: sea level rise poses an existential risk to low-lying Pacific island states; maritime zones underpin Pacific economies; states and coalitions like the Pacific Islands Forum and AOSIS emphasize stable maritime zones; this section grounds the policy in a recognized international-law context and the need to adapt to changing baselines.
Statement of Policy
The policy commits the United States to ensuring sea level rise does not erode statehood or membership in international bodies, to working with other countries to advance related objectives, and to preserving maritime zones as established under international law (UNCLOS). It also endorses baselines alignment and encourages other countries to adopt similar policies.
Report
Section 4 imposes a 120-day deadline for the Secretary of State, in consultation with other federal agencies, to submit a report to Congress on efforts to promote the adoption of the described policies by foreign countries and international organizations. The contents include a comprehensive review of initiatives, an assessment of barriers, and a list of countries and organizations that have adopted such policies. The report must be unclassified, with a potential classified annex, and is sent to the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Foreign Affairs across all five countries.
Explore Foreign Affairs in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Pacific Island Forum member states benefit from a policy framework that supports the preservation of their baselines and maritime rights in light of sea level rise.
- Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) gains from a coordinated international approach that amplifies their longstanding concerns about statehood and maritime entitlements.
- The U.S. Department of State and other relevant federal agencies benefit from a clear, codified process to guide diplomacy and interagency coordination.
- International organizations involved in UNCLOS and maritime law benefit from structured U.S. engagement and policy alignment.
- Coastal industries (fisheries, offshore energy, shipping) benefit from clearer, more stable baselines that support resource access and long-term planning.
Who Bears the Cost
- U.S. State Department and other agencies incur administrative costs to compile data, conduct consultations, and prepare the report.
- Foreign governments may incur costs to assess and align their policies with the described U.S.-promoted approaches.
- International organizations could face higher coordination burdens to respond to U.S.-driven policy imperatives.
- Domestic governmental agencies may face ongoing, though modest, administrative overhead associated with interagency collaboration and reporting obligations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether the U.S. should actively promote and codify policies to preserve statehood and maritime zones in the face of sea level rise—potentially stabilizing baselines at the risk of freezing contested or evolving international baselines and risking diplomatic friction if other states interpret these measures as unilateral leverage.
The bill creates a formal diplomatic-policy framework around a climate-change impact on statehood and maritime zones. While it promises interagency coordination and a focused reporting process, it relies on international legal norms (like UNCLOS) that are themselves evolving in the face of rising seas.
The main implementation challenges include gathering comprehensive interagency data, achieving consensus on what constitutes an adopted policy abroad, and reconciling any discrepancies between existing baselines and new baselines suggested by international partners. There is also potential for tension between preserving current baselines and the need to adapt to scientific and legal developments in maritime law, which could slow diplomatic progress or create disputes among maritime nations.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.