Results
| Title | Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Agency Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forgotten Victims of War: Animals and the International Law of Armed Conflict | Saba Pipia | 28 Animal L. 175 (2022) | The present article analyses the protection of animals in times of armed conflict. The primary objective of this article is to explore the relationship between animal law and international humanitarian law and to find out to what extent rules of animal welfare law can be applied during armed conflict and how international humanitarian law can protect animals. For this purpose, the article firstly provides an overview of legal scholarship, as well as a summary of existing international humanitarian law norms protecting animals. The article also discusses if existing models of protection of non-human victims of war, such as natural environment and cultural heritage, analogously, can be applied to include animals under the protection of international humanitarian law. Furthermore, possible scenarios of animal victimhood during wars are outlined and finally, the article offers several practical suggestions on how animal welfare law can become part of the international law of armed conflict. | ||
| Free Exercise Does Not Protect Animal Sacrifice: The Misconception of Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah and Constitutional Solutions for Stopping Animal Sacrifice | Shannon L. Doheny | 2 Journal of Animal Law 121 (2006) | In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a First Amendment religious free exercise challenge brought by a Florida Santerían church in Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. However, Lukumi may be the most misunderstood legal precedent in recent history. The decision is often cited for the proposition that religious practitioners have a constitutional right to engage in animal sacrifice. This is far from the truth. Lukumi was decided in a unique context, and its holding was not based on the merits of animal sacrifice. This article will demonstrate that Lukumi does not force government to acquiesce to animal sacrifice, or the “litter” it creates. |
||
| FREE SPEECH, ANIMAL LAW, AND FOOD ACTIVISM | Howard F. Lyman | 5 Animal L. i (1999) | Howard Lyman discusses a case that provides an example of using the law to force activists to use their scarce resources in court to defend the right of free speech. | ||
| Frequently Asked Questions on Local Dog Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This article answers some typical questions relating to local dog laws. |
||
| From Factory Farming to A Sustainable Food System: A Legislative Approach | Michelle Johnson-Weider | 32 Geo. Envtl. L. Rev. 685 (2020) | This Article explores the true costs of widespread industrialized agricultural practices in the United States (“U.S.”), particularly the most egregious of those practices—concentrated animal feeding operations (“CAFOs”). For nearly a hundred years, the United States has used federal policy and taxpayer dollars to support agricultural practices focused on high yields and cheap animal-based protein. As a result, the United States is reaping a harvest of toxicity: drinking water contaminated with cancer-causing nitrates and cyanobacteria, untreated animal sewage flooding across watersheds and adulterating crops, and dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico and the Chesapeake Bay that cost state fishing and tourism industries hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues. Society picks up the true cost of “cheap meat” while industrialized agriculture thrives in a seemingly endless stream of federal support. It is long past time for a change. This Article proposes legislation that would leverage the power of the federal government to promote sustainable agricultural practices to reduce and eventually reverse the devastating health, economic, and environmental impacts of industrialized agricultural production. | ||
| From Inside the Cage to Outside the Box: Natural Resources as a Platform for Nonhuman | Randall S. Abate & Jonathan Crowe | 5 Global J. Animal L. 54 (2017) | This article considers the legal avenues available to protect nonhuman animals in the U.S. and Australia, focusing particularly on the attribution of legal personhood. Section 2 of the article reviews attempts by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) to establish legal personhood protections for nonhuman animals through writ of habeas corpus petitions under U.S. common law. Section 3 surveys the options for recognition of animal personhood under Australian law, discussing issues of standing, habeas corpus, and guardianship models. Section 4 discusses the growing movement to assign legal personhood rights to natural resources. The article proposes that to the extent that natural resources have received legal personhood protection to recognize their inherent value, similar protections should be afforded to animals. In the meantime, habeas corpus, standing, and guardianship theories provide valuable procedural platforms for incremental progress toward protecting nonhuman animals in both the U.S. and Australia. | ||
| From Microbe to Man | Mark O. Hatfield | 1 Animal L. 5 (1995) | This article discusses federal policy towards animal patenting, including the Senator's introduction of legislation to establish a National Ethics Advisory Board, and current issues in bioethics. | ||
| From Social Justice to Animal Liberation | Carter Dillard and Matthew Hamity | 18 Animal & Nat. Resource L. Rev. 57 (2022) | Protecting and liberating animals is surely part of social justice’s core of freeing the vulnerable from the powerful, but in many ways the animal movement exists outside of that tide. Arguably that is because of its historic focus on the animals themselves, rather than upon the antecedent, anthropocentric, and outcome-determining nature of human power systems, the ones through which humans oppress one another, and the systems many animal advocates unwittingly accept even as those systems undo any progress—though things like population growth—the advocates claim to be making. This myopia makes claims regarding animal law and liberation a misnomer. Recent attacks on women’s bodily autonomy in terminating pregnancies which will also have a devastating impact on nonhumans, and the animal rights movement’s relative silence in the face of these attacks while continuing largely performative campaigns, is exemplary. This article offers recognition of these power systems through an animal rights perspective, systems which threaten humans and nonhumans from a common source, and a framework for threading animal rights into social justice more generally to overcome those specific actors—many of whom masquerade as animal activists—behind the power imbalance. It also offers a test for the success of the transition, whereby normative systems come to rely on true consent more than coercion or incentives, as a sign that power is being redistributed from the powerful to the vulnerable. | ||
| FROM THE HALLS OF CONGRESS TO THE SHORES OF THE LITTLE T: THE SNAIL DARTER AND THE DAM: HOW PORK-BARREL POLITICS ENDANGERED A LITTLE FISH AND KILLED A RIVER BY ZYGMUNT J. B. PLATER | Sarah Blankenship | 20 Animal L. 229 (2013) | The snail darter has become a symbol of environmental extremism. In reality, however, the farmers, members of the Cherokee Nation, and concerned citizens were simply fighting to keep the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)’s Tellico Dam from destroying the last free-flowing miles of the Little Tennessee River. This Book Review examines the work of Zygmunt J.B. Plater, the law professor who, along with ordinary citizens, fought their case all the way to the United States Supreme Court in defense of their river, the snail darter, and the Endangered Species Act. Plater reveals the truth behind the landmark TVA v. Hill case in The Snail Darter and the Dam: How Pork-Barrel Politics Endangered a Little Fish and Killed a River, by recounting the history of the region and evolution of the case. He also exposes the perverse pork-barrel politics behind the Tellico Dam, and reveals the power of media on the public’s perception of the snail darter case that resonates to this day. This Review highlights the most important aspects of Plater’s story, but it also examines the ways in which Plater and his team could have improved the public perception of the TVA v. Hill controversy. This Review urges everyone who wishes to enter the public sphere to have their voices heard to read The Snail Darter and the Dam for its inspirational and instructive importance. | ||
| Fuzzy Toys and Fuzzy Feelings: How the “Disney” Culture Provides the Necessary Psychological Link to Improving Animal Welfare | Lindsay Schafer Hurt | 10 J. Animal & Nat. Resource L. 253 | The connection between pop culture's psychological influences on society and on people's ability to empathize helps explain the legal shift to address practices of animal testing, animal fighting, and other abuse or torturous practices. The media helps cultivate increased sentiment for animal welfare, which is the first hurdle to overcome when advocating for a change regarding animals in the law. This Note discusses specifically how Disney movies featuring animal characters have furthered an interest in animal welfare. This Note further proposes that courts' realization that scientific evidence of suffering is inadequate to measure or identify cruelty is essential to sufficiently provide legal protections to animals. |