The Washington Post Turns to Christopher Abel for Insight on Titanic Artifacts Dispute
The Washington Post
Willcox Savage Member Christopher Abel, who also serves as an adjunct professor of admiralty law at William & Mary Law School, was recently quoted in The Washington Post regarding a legal dispute over the proposed sale of artifacts recovered from the Titanic wreck. Drawing on his knowledge of admiralty, salvage, and treasure salvage law, Abel helped explain the legal framework underlying the dispute and offered his assessment of the competing arguments.
The article examines competing arguments before a federal court in Norfolk concerning whether certain artifacts may be sold separately from the broader Titanic collection. The sale is opposed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the federal agency representing U.S. interests in the case, which argues that the artifacts should remain part of the complete collection.
Abel weighed in on the competing legal positions, noting that NOAA's argument appears to be the stronger legal and logical interpretation of the court's prior orders governing the collection.
“It seems to me that the NOAA has the better version of the argument. Their case for why ‘No, everything means everything and it includes the French artifacts’ seems to have both the best logical and legal argument being made,” Abel told The Washington Post.
