May 01, 2026
Five “Blockades” and One Legal Problem: Naval Enforcement in the U.S.–Iran Conflict
This article was originally published on Just Security.
There are not one, but five distinct blockade-style operations underway in the U.S.-Iran armed conflict. Each has different legal authorities, and each raises different legal issues and operational risks. The central problem is not simply that there are multiple blockade-like operations—it is that the United States is collapsing distinct legal authorities into a single “blockade” framework, obscuring the legal basis for each. These operations draw from distinct legal paradigms that are increasingly being blurred.
First, Iran blockaded the Strait of Hormuz on March 2—an illegal blockade that has been remarkably effective, bringing maritime traffic in the Strait to a standstill.
The Pentagon should clarify, with precision, the legal authorities underpinning each maritime enforcement action.
Read the full article on Just Security.
More from CNAS
-
Modernize States’ Legislative Efforts on Unsanctioned Militias While Protecting Constitutional Rights
Commentary
Matt Gimovsky is senior corporate counsel at Kroll and an Army JAG with active-duty experience in administrative law and with the trial defense service....
By Matt Gimovsky
-
Blurring the Line
Commentary
Mark Nevitt is currently an associate professor of law at Emory University School of Law and a CNAS adjunct senior fellow....
By Mark Nevitt
-
Masked and Anonymous
Commentary
David Aaron is a former Manhattan assistant district attorney and Department of Justice national security and cyber prosecutor. He is now in private practice at an AmLaw 50 la...
By David Aaron
-
Distinguishing Between Soldiers and Law Enforcement Officers
Commentary
Carrie F. Cordero is the Robert M. Gates senior fellow and director of the National Security Law Program at CNAS....
By Carrie Cordero
