Since its inception, supporters of the Jones Act have claimed that the law is essential to U.S. national security. Although indefensible on economic grounds, Jones Act advocates argue that its restrictions promote the development of both a U.S. merchant marine and shipbuilding and repair capability that can be utilized by the country's military in times of war. In a new study, Cato scholar Colin Grabow examines the national security justification and finds that the law has produced an outcome that is perilously at odds with its stated goals.
