After a Gulf Coast fraud scandal, it’s now illegal to serve mystery seafood in Mississippi

A new labeling law hits every menu

Every piece of seafood and crawfish sold in Mississippi now needs a clear label: domestic or imported. The rule took effect July 1, 2025, and covers grocery stores, seafood markets, restaurants, and even food trucks.

Wholesalers and processors have to follow it too. The Mississippi Legislature passed House Bill 602 without a single “no” vote in the House.

Rep. Brent Anderson of Gulfport wrote the bill after a fraud scandal rocked the Gulf Coast.

A Biloxi restaurant sold fake Gulf fish

The law traces back to a major fraud case. Mary Mahoney’s Old French House, a well-known Biloxi restaurant open since 1962, pleaded guilty in 2024 to federal charges of misbranding seafood and wire fraud.

The restaurant sold about 58,750 pounds of frozen imported fish as locally caught Gulf snapper and grouper between 2013 and 2019. The fish actually came from Africa, India, and South America.

FDA genetic testing confirmed the switch.

The penalties hit both seller and supplier

Mary Mahoney’s got five years of probation and paid about $1.5 million in fines.

Co-owner Anthony Cvitanovich received three years of probation, four months of home confinement, and a $10,000 fine.

The restaurant’s supplier, Quality Poultry and Seafood, was the biggest seafood distributor on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. A court ordered QPS to pay $1.5 million in fines and forfeiture.

QPS sales manager Todd Rosetti spent eight months in federal prison.

FDA banned the supplier from importing food

The federal government added its own punishment. In May 2025, the FDA banned Quality Poultry and Seafood from importing any food into the United States for five years. That is the maximum ban federal law allows.

The order kicked in after QPS failed to respond to the FDA’s notice or ask for a hearing. The ban closed off a pipeline that had funneled mislabeled fish into Gulf Coast restaurants for years.

DNA testing found the problem ran deep

Before lawmakers wrote the bill, DNA testing told a troubling story.

SeaD Consulting, a genetic testing firm working for the Southern Shrimp Alliance, tested shrimp at 44 randomly chosen Mississippi coastal restaurants.

About 39% of them served imported shrimp while advertising domestic products.

Similar testing across the Gulf Coast and Southeast has found high mislabeling rates in several states. About 90% or more of the shrimp eaten in the United States is imported, according to federal data.

Labels must match the font size

The law spells out exactly what sellers need to show. “Domestic” means the seafood was harvested, raised, and processed in the United States.

“Imported” means any part that happened outside the country. Labels have to appear on menus, packaging, sales displays, and any public ad.

The text must be printed in a font at least as big as the product name. If a dish mixes domestic and imported seafood, the label must say “imported.”

Crawfish falls under the new rules

The law covers saltwater finfish, crustaceans, shellfish, and other saltwater aquatic life sold for human consumption. Crawfish got its own mention in the bill too.

One exception: catfish. Mississippi already had a separate labeling law for farm-raised catfish under the Department of Agriculture and Commerce, so lawmakers left that one alone.

Everything else that comes from the water and ends up on a plate now needs a label.

Two agencies split the enforcement work

The Mississippi Department of Marine Resources handles inspections in coastal counties, while the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce covers the rest of the state. Both agencies started inspections on July 1, 2025.

Inspectors can walk into any business selling seafood to check labels and collect samples for lab and genetic testing. The split gives both agencies a clear lane and puts inspectors closer to the businesses they oversee.

First-timers get a warning, then fines climb

A first-time violator gets a written notice and three days to fix the problem before any fine kicks in. If the issue stays, fines range from $500 to $1,000.

A second offense carries $1,000 to $2,000. By a fourth violation, fines can reach $10,000, and the business could face misdemeanor charges with up to six months in jail.

Businesses that unknowingly break the law because they trusted their supplier’s paperwork are shielded from penalties.

A task force will shape future rules

The law also created the Mississippi Seafood Marketing Task Force.

The group will study labeling rules, genetic testing practices, and ways to promote locally sourced seafood. Its report and recommendations are due to the Legislature by Jan. 1, 2027.

Fines collected from seafood violations go to the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources and land in the Seafood Fund, which promotes the domestic seafood market. So enforcement money flows right back into the industry.

Gulf Coast neighbors passed their own laws

Mississippi is not acting alone. Louisiana has required restaurants to disclose shrimp origins since 2008 and strengthened its law in 2025.

Alabama passed a seafood labeling law in 2024 requiring sellers to state whether seafood is wild-caught or farm-raised, imported or domestic.

Texas passed a shrimp labeling law in May 2025 that bans restaurants from calling imported shrimp “Gulf shrimp” or “Texas shrimp.” Georgia and Florida have introduced similar bills, but have not passed them yet.

A federal bill aims to set national rules

In October 2025, U.S. Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi introduced the LABEL Act, which stands for Let Americans Buy with Explicit Labeling.

The bill would require all seafood sold in the country to carry country-of-origin and production-method labels in a font at least as large as the product name.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama co-sponsored it, and several industry groups back the effort. The bill has not yet advanced through Congress.

This article was created with AI assistance and human editing.

Read more from this brand:

• The wade-ins that challenged Jim Crow at Mississippi’s beaches
• The forgotten tourniquet that could have rewritten Civil War history
• Payback at Tupelo: The 61st US Colored Troops vs. General Forrest