The article discusses how some courts are wrongly requiring a vessel to be involved in maritime tort cases, which goes against the current guidelines set by the Supreme Court and Congress. This can lead to unfair outcomes for plaintiffs seeking justice for injuries related to maritime activities. The authors argue that sticking to the existing two-part test for admiralty jurisdiction is more effective in protecting maritime commerce than adding a vessel requirement. They suggest that Congress or the Supreme Court should step in to prevent this unnecessary hurdle in obtaining justice for maritime torts.