Results

The purpose of this Note is to consider the widespread implications of United States v. Stevens. Specifically, this Note will consider the likelihood of future findings of a compelling governmental interest, the level of harm required when balancing competing interests, Congress's ability to supplement ineffective laws, and the Court's ability to recognize new categories of speech unworthy of even basic First Amendment protection.

This outline provides links to the cases that relate to the sale of companion animals. While not an exhaustive list, it does provide a sampling of the case law in the area.

This overview explores the recent changes in probate law related to wills and trusts for the continuing care of animals.

This article recounts a modern-day King Solomon story: the baby is the animals left behind during Hurricane Katrina; the two mothers claiming ownership of the “baby” are the original owners of the animals and those who adopted the animals after the hurricane; and the role of King Solomon is played by judges in the custody cases that arose after the storm. This article provides a summary of those custody disputes while examining the question of whether those who left their pets behind during Hurricane Katrina have the right to reclaim them from the animals’ new adoptive family. The animals of Hurricane Katrina became trapped in the middle of an unfortunate and complicated situation largely because of defects in our national policies and laws regarding animals and disasters. Therefore, this article also reviews legislative changes that have and should occur concerning pets and disasters, pet adoption, and animals as property.

This article touches on the evolution of property classifications through history and suggests that the time has arrived for society to re-conceptualize its view on animals as personal property. Re-categorizing animals as equivalent, sentient beings has the potential to affect current search and seizure practices under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. This article proposes policy changes that could significantly benefit neglected and abused animals, while still recognizing the fundamental liberty interests of pet owners.

This Comment examines the reasons for breed-specific legislation and looks at some of the human factors behind the “breed” problem. It argues that instead of targeting specific breeds, municipalities should enforce existing animal control laws and punish the human behavior that leads to dog attacks. This Comment concludes that laws addressing human behavior, rather than breed bans, are a better long-term solution to further public safety and animal welfare.

In “Playing Noah,” John Copeland Nagle investigates the difficulty of protecting all endangered species through the implementation of the Endangered Species Act. In doing so, Nagle looks at utilitarian arguments and concludes that these arguments do not justify treating all species equally. Instead, Nagle concludes that religious, moral, or ethical arguments provide a better justification. Specifically, Nagle contends that the book of Genesis provides a compelling case for protecting all endangered species.

This is an outline-overview of the pleadings and briefs on the Web Center. The materials contained in the Web Center are broken down by specific topic with links to the case summaries and actual pleadings documents.