Structural Gaps in Deep-Sea Mining Governance: American Samoa and the Territorial Public Law Framework

• Daniel F. Aga

  Independent Research Scholar

  Author

Deep-sea mining (DSM) in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) adjacent to American Samoa raises unresolved questions at the intersection of federal authority, territorial governance, and Indigenous institutional commitments. Although federal agencies possess broad regulatory authority offshore, existing statutory frameworks governing ocean resources were developed primarily for continental contexts and do not account for the distinctive legal and cultural foundations of American Samoa. This article examines how gaps in current law and administration expose the territory to unilateral federal decision-making without mechanisms tailored to its constitutional status.

Drawing on territorial constitutional doctrine, the Deeds of Cession, and comparative territorial precedent, the article argues that existing governance structures are incomplete rather than constitutionally fixed. It situates deep-sea mining within a broader pattern of tailored territorial governance and evaluates the institutional implications of this gap. The analysis concludes by considering the role of congressional commissions as a deliberative mechanism through which federal authority may be exercised in a manner consistent with established territorial practice.

1. American Samoa. (1967). Revised Constitution of American Samoa (approved June 29, 1967; effective July 1, 1967)

2. American Samoa Code Annotated § 1.0102

3. Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008)

4. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. (2012). Pacific OCS region programmatic environmental impact statement. U.S. Department of the Interior.

5. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. (2023). Request for information: Commercial leasing for deep sea mining. U.S. Department of the Interior.

6. Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401–7671q (1970).

7. Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251–1388 (1972).

8. Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1451–1466 (1972).

9. Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, 16 U.S.C. §§ 6401–6409 (2000).

10. Craddick v. Territorial Registrar, 1 A.S.R.2d 10 (High Ct. Am. Samoa App. Div. 1980).

11. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901).

12. Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531–1544 (1973).

13. Exec. Order No. 12,898, 59 Fed. Reg. 7629 (Feb. 11, 1994).

14. Governor of American Samoa. (2023). Executive Order No. 05-2023.

15. Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act, Pub. L. No. 114-181, 130 Stat. 1602 (2016).

16. Islands of eastern Samoa, 48 U.S.C. § 1661(a)–(b) (1929).

17. Laughlin, S. K. (1995). The law of United States territories and affiliated jurisdictions. West Group.

18. Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1801–1891d (1976).

19. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. §§ 1331–1356 (1953).

20. Ponsa-Kraus, C. D. (2021). Are the Insular Cases becoming a canon of racial justice? Yale Law Journal Forum, 131, 127–171.

21. Tsosie, R. (2007). Indigenous peoples and environmental justice: The impact of climate change. University of Colorado Law Review, 78(4), 1625–1677.

22. Tuaua v. United States, 788 F.3d 300 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

23. U.S. Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians. (1982). Personal justice denied. U.S. Government Printing Office.

24. U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. (1900, April 17). Instrument of cession signed on April 17, 1900, by the representatives of the people of Tutuila.

25. U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. (1904, July 14). Instrument of cession signed July 14, 1904, by the representatives of the people of the islands of Manua.

26. Wabol v. Villacrusis, 958 F.2d 1450 (9th Cir. 1990).

• PDF

Copyright (c) 2026 Author

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.