Somewhat overshadowed by Chevron’s spectacular crash and burn last week was the Supreme Court’s decision the day before in SEC v. Jarkesy, No. 22-859 (U.S. June 27, 2024), holding that the SEC’s assessment of civil penalties in an administrative proceeding is unconstitutional because it deprives the party assessed of its Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury. This result has particular significance for those regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). Continue reading “Supreme Court Guts USDA’s Power to Assess Civil Penalties Under the Animal Welfare Act”
Supreme Court Puts an End to “Resource Drain” Standing
To paraphrase the line from “Forrest Gump,” Supreme Court opinions are like “a box of chocolates; you never know what you are going to get.” For standing nerds, there was a gem in today’s opinion in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, No. 23-25 (U.S. June 13, 2024). Continue reading “Supreme Court Puts an End to “Resource Drain” Standing”
Fourth Circuit Sends Family Dog Shooting Case to Trial
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently reversed a summary judgment in favor of a police officer who had been sued for an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment arising out of an incident that had resulted in the shooting death of a pet dog. According to the appellate court, the conflicting accounts of what happened could only be resolved by a jury. Ray v. Roane, No. 22-2120 (4th Cir. Feb. 22, 2024). Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Sends Family Dog Shooting Case to Trial”
PETA’s Animal “Shelter” Continues as a Leader in Animal Death
Animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently posted the “news” that it had “newly obtained public records” showing that certain research universities had euthanized laboratory animals during the COVID-19 pandemic and that PETA had complained about this to the National Institutes of Health. In its zeal to attack the use of animals in medical research, PETA described this as a “mass killing spree.” What this ignores, however, as reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education back in 2020 when all this happened, is that universities made these difficult decisions because they had no choice. Social distancing requirements that forced animal care personnel to stay out of the labs, precluded the delivery of proper animal care. It was not humane to allow the animals to go without food, water and other husbandry. But what we thought was particularly interesting is PETA’s use of the rhetoric “mass killing spree” in light of what goes on in its own facility in Norfolk, Virginia. Continue reading “PETA’s Animal “Shelter” Continues as a Leader in Animal Death”
Eighth Circuit Animal Rights “Ag Gag Law” Challenge Fail – Part II
Yesterday, we reported on a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that rejected a challenge by animal rights activists to a so-called “ag gag law” in Iowa. In a parallel decision the same day, the court issued another opinion rejecting a First Amendment challenge by animal rights groups to another aspect of the same law. Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds, No. 22-3464 (8th Cir. Jan. 8, 2024). Continue reading “Eighth Circuit Animal Rights “Ag Gag Law” Challenge Fail – Part II”
Animal Rights Challenge to Iowa “Ag Gag Law” Fails in Eighth Circuit
On January 8, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit rejected a constitutional challenge brought by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other groups to an Iowa statute that prohibits “agricultural facility fraud.” Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds, No. 22-1830 (8th Cir. Jan. 8, 2024). Statutes like this are often termed “ag gag laws” by their opponents. The district court had declared that the law violates the First Amendment, but the court of appeals reversed. Continue reading “Animal Rights Challenge to Iowa “Ag Gag Law” Fails in Eighth Circuit”
Nonhuman Rights Project Loses Another Habeas Case for Elephants
As we have reported previously (here, here, here, here), an animal rights group called the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) has a history of filing fruitless cases to establish that animals should have the same basic rights as people. NhRP has used the common law and statutory writ of habeas corpus in an effort to “liberate” elephants and apes from various U.S. zoos and other facilities. None of these cases has succeeded. The most recent failure occurred this month in Colorado where a state court judge denied a habeas writ with respect to five African elephants residing at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Society. Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Society, et al., No. 23CV31236 (Colo. Dist Ct., El Paso County Dec. 3, 2023). Continue reading “Nonhuman Rights Project Loses Another Habeas Case for Elephants”
Recent Study Shows Some Marine Mammals Live Longer in Zoos than in the Wild
On October 18, 2023 an interesting study appeared in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences entitled Survival improvements of marine mammals in zoological institutions mirror historical advances in human longevity. The study, conducted by a 41-author team, led by Species360 and Dr. Morgane Tidiere of the University of Southern Denmark, noted that there is an “intense public debate” over marine mammals held in captivity based on “the assumption that survival in zoological institutions remains lower than the wild.” However, the study’s findings “contradict arguments of poor or lower survival in zoological institutions than in natural habitats.” Continue reading “Recent Study Shows Some Marine Mammals Live Longer in Zoos than in the Wild”
California Court Clarifies Los Angeles County’s Power to Euthanize Shelter Dogs
On September 18, 2023, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five, issued a decision reversing a trial court’s dismissal of a case brought by two animal rescue groups challenging actions by the County of Los Angeles in euthanizing dogs rather than turning them over to animal rescue groups. Santa Paula Animal Rescue Center v. County of Los Angeles, No. B318954 (Cal. App. Sept. 18, 2023). The matter was remanded for further proceedings. Continue reading “California Court Clarifies Los Angeles County’s Power to Euthanize Shelter Dogs”
Ninth Circuit Tosses Grey Wolf Case on Standing Grounds
On June 14, 2023, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by Wildearth Guardians and other environment activist groups challenging the grazing permit decisions of the U.S. Forest Service in the Colville National Forest in Eastern Washington. The district court found that plaintiffs had no standing and the appellate court agreed. Wildearth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Service, No. 21-35936 (9th Cir. June 14, 2023). Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Tosses Grey Wolf Case on Standing Grounds”