How we work: facts are checked against original sources and linked, cruise prices are verified on the cruise line’s own website the day we publish, and we earn no commissions. Spotted a mistake? Tell us and we will correct it.
Three days before the SS United States is due to be towed out of Mobile to be sunk, a federal judge in Pensacola was asked to stop it. On Friday morning, November 6, 2026, she said no.
Her reasons weren’t history or hull paint. They were paperwork and money. Nobody had sworn to the facts in the emergency motion. And the people asking her to freeze a 990-foot ocean liner wanted the court to skip the bond that would cover the cost of keeping it afloat.
So the plan holds: tow from Mobile on Monday, November 9, and sink her as a reef off Destin, Florida, on Thursday, November 12, weather permitting.
Four Days in Court, From the Docket
We read the case file: SS United States Preservation Foundation, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 3:26-cv-05339 (N.D. Fla.). The Foundation and its co-founder, Steven R. Perry, are suing the Corps, three Army officials and Okaloosa County, which owns the ship.
| Date (2026) | What happened | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 2 | The Corps approves the permit to sink her about 22 nautical miles southwest of Destin East Pass | Complaint ¶3; Exhibit 1 |
| Oct 19 | The Foundation says it finally gets that assessment, five months after a FOIA request | Complaint ¶1 |
| Oct 29 | Coast Guard Sector Mobile names November 9 as the expected tow date | Complaint ¶3 |
| Nov 3 | A 58-page complaint is filed, with six exhibits. The clerk flags wrongly entered party names and a missing cover sheet | Docket entries 1, 3, 6 |
| Nov 4 | The cover sheet arrives, and so does the emergency motion for a restraining order | Entries 7, 8 |
| Nov 6 | Judge M. Casey Rodgers denies the motion “without prejudice” | Entry 9 |
| Nov 9 | Planned tow out of Mobile | Okaloosa County, via Lagniappe and Cruise Hive |
| Nov 12, 10 a.m. | Planned start of the sinking, weather permitting | County announcement, quoted in the complaint |
The suit says the Corps broke the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, and that the county began “anticipatory demolition,” removing both funnels and the radar mast in August 2025, mid-review (Mid Bay News also covered the filing).
🛳️ The week's verified cruise deals, every Friday
Every fare checked on the cruise line's own site. We'll also send your free Cruise Survival Kit right away, with a printable packing checklist and money-saving cheat sheet.
Send me the deals →The complaint’s line on why the Foundation is suing is blunt: “If the SS United States is sunk, the Foundation loses its sole reason for existence.”
Why the Judge Said No
A temporary restraining order can be issued before the other side is heard, so Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(A) demands that “specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result.” In plain terms, someone has to swear the facts are true.
Nobody had. The three-page order says: “No affidavits accompany the motion, and the corresponding complaint is unverified.”
Then came the bond. Rule 65(c) says a restraining order issues “only if the movant gives security” to cover the costs of anyone “wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” The Foundation’s motion asked for “either no or a nominal bond,” citing its nonprofit, public-interest status. The judge wasn’t having it:
“Plaintiffs’ request fails to recognize the obvious substantial expense associated with the injunction it requests; i.e. berthing, mooring, docking, storing, etc. a vessel as large as the SS United States.”
Anyone who followed this ship’s years in Philadelphia knows where that comes from: a rent fight over her pier is how she ended up for sale. Any new motion, the order says, “must propose a bond amount sufficient to cover these expenses, supported by a reasonable factual basis.”
The Philadelphia Inquirer and Lagniappe both reported the denial. The Foundation’s lawyer, Matthew Farmer, declined to comment to Lagniappe.
The Real Fight Is Over the Paint
The environmental case rests on zinc chromate, an anti-corrosion primer used on ships of the 1950s that contains hexavalent chromium. The Corps’ own Environmental Assessment, filed as Exhibit 1, sets out both sides:
| Question | The Foundation says | The county and the Corps say |
|---|---|---|
| Is it there? | York Analytical Laboratories found hexavalent chromium at 4,520 mg/kg in paint chips, and a second lab found 146 mg/kg | The county agrees it is “consistent with” 1950s zinc chromate primer, but says it doesn’t know where or how the samples were taken, and that the sampling was “conducted in secret” |
| How much? | About 59,334 pounds of zinc chromate, estimated by a University of Florida professor from the 1952 painting schedule | The county calls this “AI-assisted surface area modeling” and puts the real figure at less than a third of that. The Corps says it extrapolates from “a single sample prior to remediation” |
| Will it leak? | Seawater will break down the coatings and release chromium and zinc into the Gulf | The Corps accepts that some release may happen, slowly. Gulf water, at a pH of about 7.5 to 8.1, tends to slow it, and the Corps expects the effects to be “negligible” |
| Is it hazardous waste? | The estimate is far above the 10-pound federal reporting threshold for chromium(VI) | Remaining chromate “would not be considered hazardous waste based on RCRA or TSCA definitions” |
Okaloosa County’s FAQ puts it shortly: the coating “is not a federally regulated substance when it comes to artificial reefing.” County officials told Cruise Fever that EPA guidelines don’t require stripping intact paint. Friday’s order decides none of this. It ruled only on the paperwork and the bond, and the lawsuit carries on.
What Happens Next
“Denied without prejudice” means the Foundation can try again with sworn statements and a costed bond, if it moves fast. It wouldn’t be the first loss for the ship’s defenders: in August 2025, CBS Philadelphia reported that a federal judge in Florida threw out a separate suit by the New York Coalition to Save the Steam Ship United States because the group “lacked standing.”
The county isn’t waiting. “We’re going to continue to take steps to follow through with our plans,” spokesman Nick Tomecek told Lagniappe. He told the Inquirer that next week “would be one of celebration.” The Inquirer puts the county’s spending on buying and preparing her at more than $13 million.
If You Want to Watch, or Dive Her Later
- Treat every date as “weather permitting.” The county says so itself. Travelling to Destin for it? Book something you can cancel.
- Boaters: keep your distance. Cruise Hive reports a 100-yard moving Coast Guard safety zone around the tow, and at the sinking site non-participating boats must stay at least one nautical mile away.
- Watch from land. Cruise Hive lists a sendoff at the Destin-Fort Walton Beach Convention Center (November 11, 1:30 p.m.) and a Destin viewing party (November 12, 9 a.m.). The local tourism office says it will post a livestream link.
- Divers: check your certification first. The county’s FAQ puts the seabed at 180 feet and the upper deck at about 55. Our earlier story has the state’s training advice for the nearby Oriskany.
The fastest liner ever built has outrun most things for 74 years. This week the people trying to save her couldn’t get past a missing affidavit and a bond nobody had priced. We’ll update this story if a new motion is filed before Monday.
Cruise Chaos earns nothing from cruise lines and doesn’t run booking affiliate links. The docket, complaint, Exhibit 1, motion and order were read on CourtListener, and Rule 65 on Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, on November 6, 2026. Spot an error? Tell us and we’ll correct it.
Got a cruise story like this?
Something wild, strange or funny happened on your sailing? Tell us what happened. We read every story, fact-check it, and email you before anything is published.
Keep Reading
- The Fastest Liner Ever Built Lost a Rent Fight. Next Month She Becomes a Reef
- A Shipyard Had a Casino Ship Arrested Over $790,666, Slot Machines Included
- The Ship Meant for a Three-Year World Cruise Is Being Auctioned for Scrap
Sources
- CourtListener: SS United States Preservation Foundation v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 3:26-cv-05339 (N.D. Fla.), docket
- Order denying the emergency motion, November 6, 2026 (ECF 9)
- Plaintiffs’ emergency motion for TRO and preliminary injunction (ECF 8)
- Complaint (ECF 1) and Exhibit 1: Corps Environmental Assessment and Statement of Findings
- Cornell LII: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65
- Okaloosa County: SS United States FAQs
- Lagniappe: Judge scuttles attempt to stop sinking ship
- The Philadelphia Inquirer: People are still fighting, and failing, to ‘save’ the SS United States
- Cruise Hive: Lawsuit Seeks to Stop SS United States Sinking Days Before Scheduled Tow
- Cruise Fever: Lawsuit Filed to Block Sinking of Historic Ocean Liner SS United States
- Mid Bay News: “Stop the sink!” SS United States group files last-minute lawsuit
- CBS News Philadelphia: Judge throws out lawsuit aimed to prevent sinking of SS United States (August 2025)
- ACHP: National Historic Preservation Act and EPA: What is the National Environmental Policy Act?
