The Brig Concord, Taylor, Master was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1815. The case involved an incident that occurred during the War of 1812 when a British vessel captured and detained the American brigantine Concord off the coast of South America. The master of the ship sued for damages on behalf of himself and his crew claiming that their detention violated international law as well as U.S. neutrality rights under Article 3 Section 9 of the Constitution which states “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance or Confederation” with foreign powers without congressional approval. In its decision, Chief Justice John Marshall held that while Congress had not authorized such action against neutral vessels at sea it did have authority to do so if necessary to protect national interests and safety from hostile forces abroad; thus affirming U.S.'s right to defend itself against enemy aggression even outside its borders in times of war or conflict

In the case of The Brig Concord, Taylor, Master, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a vessel that had been captured by an enemy and then recaptured by its original owners could be considered as having been "lawfully restored" under maritime law. In a 5-4 decision, the majority opinion held that it did not meet this requirement because there was no evidence of any formal act or declaration restoring ownership rights to the original owner. However, in his dissenting opinion Justice Story argued that since possession is nine tenths of the law and since all other legal requirements for restoration were met (such as payment of salvage), then it should be assumed that lawful title had passed back to its rightful owner upon recapture. He further noted that such an interpretation would serve justice better than one which denied restitution simply because some formality had not taken place.