Animal Rights

The Animal Question: The Key to Coming to Terms with Nature

Share

|

Summary:

In this Introduction to Volume 13, Part 2 of Animal Law, the author considers the "Animal Question" - the shorthand term "for all of those difficult questions about our views of, and relations with,nonhuman animals."

In this Introduction to Volume 13, Part 2 of Animal Law, the author considers the "Animal Question" - the shorthand term "for all of those difficult questions about our views of, and relations with,nonhuman animals."

Symposium: Confronting Barriers To The Courtroom For Animal Advocates - Introduction

Share

|

Summary:

On April 14, 2006, the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund of New York University School of Law hosted a symposium on how to overcome some common courtroom barriers faced by animal advocates. Panelists discussed cultural and legal transitions, legal standing for nonhuman animals, and potential causes of action. Symposium participants included prominent attorneys, authors, philosophers, and professors specializing in the field of animal protection law.

On April 14, 2006, the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund of New York University School of Law hosted a symposium on how to overcome some common courtroom barriers faced by animal advocates. Panelists discussed cultural and legal transitions, legal standing for nonhuman animals, and potential causes of action. Symposium participants included prominent attorneys, authors, philosophers, and professors specializing in the field of animal protection law.

Symposium: Confronting Barriers To The Courtroom For Animal Advocates - Conclusion

Share

|

Summary:

David Wolfson concludes the events of the day by highlighting some of the significant issues raised by the participants in the conference, as well as the obstacles animal lawyers have faced and are working to overcome, including legal, political, and cultural barriers. Wolfson ends on an optimistic note, stating that given that the basic foundations of the animal protection movement are correct, the movement should ultimately be successful.

David Wolfson concludes the events of the day by highlighting some of the significant issues raised by the participants in the conference, as well as the obstacles animal lawyers have faced and are working to overcome, including legal, political, and cultural barriers. Wolfson ends on an optimistic note, stating that given that the basic foundations of the animal protection movement are correct, the movement should ultimately be successful.

Think or be Damned: The Problematic Case of Higher Cognition in Animals and Legislation for Animal Welfare

Share

|

Summary:

Recent discoveries of higher cognitive abilities in some species of birds and mammals are bringing about radical changes in our attitudes to animals and will lead to changes in legislation for the protection of animals. We fully support these developments, but at the same time we recognize that the scientific study of higher cognition in animals has touched on only a small number of vertebrate species. Accordingly, we warn that calls to extend rights, or to at least better welfare protection, for the handful of species that have revealed their intelligence to us may be counterproductive. While this would improve the treatment of the selected few, be they birds or mammals, a vast majority of species, even closely related ones, will be left out. This may not be a particular problem if being left out is only a temporary state that can be changed as new information becomes available. But, in practice, those protected and not protected are separated by a barrier that can be more difficult to remove than it was to erect in the first place. We summarize the recent research on higher cognition from the position of active researchers in animal behavior and neuroscience.

Recent discoveries of higher cognitive abilities in some species of birds and mammals are bringing about radical changes in our attitudes to animals and will lead to changes in legislation for the protection of animals. We fully support these developments, but at the same time we recognize that the scientific study of higher cognition in animals has touched on only a small number of vertebrate species. Accordingly, we warn that calls to extend rights, or to at least better welfare protection, for the handful of species that have revealed their intelligence to us may be counterproductive. While this would improve the treatment of the selected few, be they birds or mammals, a vast majority of species, even closely related ones, will be left out. This may not be a particular problem if being left out is only a temporary state that can be changed as new information becomes available. But, in practice, those protected and not protected are separated by a barrier that can be more difficult to remove than it was to erect in the first place. We summarize the recent research on higher cognition from the position of active researchers in animal behavior and neuroscience.

Animal Welfare: Its Place in Legislation

Share

|

Summary:

Comments by Congressman Christopher Shays: Animal welfare will continue to be a challenge. By advocating animal welfare legislation at the federal level, states, the private sector, and individuals can follow clearer, more humane guideline regarding the safety of all animals. As co-chairs of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, Congressman Lantos and I will continue to educate lawmakers about the importance of animal welfare initiatives at all levels.

Comments by Congressman Christopher Shays: Animal welfare will continue to be a challenge. By advocating animal welfare legislation at the federal level, states, the private sector, and individuals can follow clearer, more humane guideline regarding the safety of all animals. As co-chairs of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, Congressman Lantos and I will continue to educate lawmakers about the importance of animal welfare initiatives at all levels.

Five Years of the New Animal Welfare Regime: Lessons Learned from New Zealand's Decision to Modernize Its Animal Welfare Legislation

Share

|

Summary:

In 1999, New Zealand took an ambitious step to update its animal welfare legislation. The new law included a limited provision to protect Great Apes from scientific experimentation that was heralded internationally as a huge step forward for animals. The Author suggests, however, that New Zealand’s other animals have not fared nearly as well under the new law, and that the notion of New Zealand as the “animal friendly” nation implied by its treatment of primates is more about perception than reality. This article explores the New Zealand experience, and suggests lessons that can be drawn from the modernization of its animal welfare legislation.

In 1999, New Zealand took an ambitious step to update its animal welfare legislation. The new law included a limited provision to protect Great Apes from scientific experimentation that was heralded internationally as a huge step forward for animals. The Author suggests, however, that New Zealand’s other animals have not fared nearly as well under the new law, and that the notion of New Zealand as the “animal friendly” nation implied by its treatment of primates is more about perception than reality. This article explores the New Zealand experience, and suggests lessons that can be drawn from the modernization of its animal welfare legislation.

Caging Animal Advocates Political Freedoms: The Unconstitutionality of the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act

Share

|

Summary:

The animal advocacy movement is facing another obstacle, resulting from the creation of the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act (AETA). The Act seeks to create harsh penalties including a Terrorist Registry for acts performed by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and ALF-type actors. In addition, the proposed legislation will affect animal advocates not involved with the ALF. However, the model legislation, as written, must pass Constitutional scrutiny. This paper argues that the proposed Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act is unconstitutional due to its infringement on the First Amendment, its overbreadth, and its vagueness.

The animal advocacy movement is facing another obstacle, resulting from the creation of the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act (AETA). The Act seeks to create harsh penalties including a Terrorist Registry for acts performed by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and ALF-type actors. In addition, the proposed legislation will affect animal advocates not involved with the ALF. However, the model legislation, as written, must pass Constitutional scrutiny. This paper argues that the proposed Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act is unconstitutional due to its infringement on the First Amendment, its overbreadth, and its vagueness.

International Animal Rights: Specieism and Exclusionary Human Dignity

Share

|

Summary:

The primary goal of this paper is to act as a heuristic device, to suggest an unconventional but practical perspective on the evolution of international law. Upon surveying discourse on the history of international law, texts of treaties, and declarations and writings of influential philosophers of law and morality, an antiquated perspective of humanity is apparent. A convention in international law, and a reflection of a common idea which feeds the foreboding trend of how humans relate to the planet, treats humanity as distinctively separate from the Earth’s biodiversity. Though environmental law is beginning to recognize the necessity of conserving biodiversity, a subjugating conceptualization of other species has inhibited the development, application, and legitimacy of the principle of sustainability. The belittling view of other species in relation to ourselves also creates inconsistencies within international law and undermines the integrity and sophistication of its development. International human rights law is especially affected.

The primary goal of this paper is to act as a heuristic device, to suggest an unconventional but practical perspective on the evolution of international law. Upon surveying discourse on the history of international law, texts of treaties, and declarations and writings of influential philosophers of law and morality, an antiquated perspective of humanity is apparent. A convention in international law, and a reflection of a common idea which feeds the foreboding trend of how humans relate to the planet, treats humanity as distinctively separate from the Earth’s biodiversity. Though environmental law is beginning to recognize the necessity of conserving biodiversity, a subjugating conceptualization of other species has inhibited the development, application, and legitimacy of the principle of sustainability. The belittling view of other species in relation to ourselves also creates inconsistencies within international law and undermines the integrity and sophistication of its development. International human rights law is especially affected.