Law Commons^™

All Dogs Get Regulatory Protection—And This Means Wolves Too: Extending Species- Specific Animal Welfare Act Protections, Megan Edwards

Pace Environmental Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With Its Purported Purposes: A Proposal For Equality Amongst Non-Human Animals, Jane Kotzmann, Gisela Nip

Pace Environmental Law Review

The United States has a strong history of enacting laws to protect animals from the pain and suffering inflicted by humans. Indeed, the passage of the Massachusetts’ Body of Liberties in 1641 made it the first country in the world to pass such laws. Nevertheless, contemporary animal protection laws in all jurisdictions of the United States are limited in their ability to adequately realize their primary purpose of protecting animals from unnecessary or unjustifiable pain and suffering. This is a result of limited statutory definitions of ‘animal’ and far-reaching exclusions commonly found in animal protection legislation. These exclusions frequently apply …

Why Is It A Crime To Stomp On A Goldfish? Harm, Victimhood And The Structure Of Anti-Cruelty Offenses, Luis E. Chiesa

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the article it is argued that, contrary to what prominent animal law scholars such as Gary Francione claim, we have decided to criminalize harm to animals primarily because we are concerned about the wellbeing of such creatures, not because doing so furthers some other human interest. I do so in four parts.

Part I provides a brief historical analysis of animal cruelty laws that will show that, although many of these statutes were originally enacted as a way to protect private property, there has been a marked trend, specially in recent times, to punish animal cruelty regardless, and sometimes …

Bred Meat--The Cultural Foundation Of The Factory Farm, David N. Cassuto

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article argues that the ability of large-scale industrial farms to commodify animals in the face of strong countervailing social forces stems in large part from the legal system’s embrace of a secularized but nonetheless deeply religious vision of human ascendancy. Within this belief system, animals comprise beings through whom we define ourselves by contrast and to whom we deny ingress to the legal system. The impulse to increase protections for nonhuman animals is offset by institutionally privileged categories of behavior that commodify nonhumans and strip them of legal defenses. The resulting lattice of laws purports to safeguard animals while …