Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| ON THE "NECESSARY SUFFERING" OF NONHUMAN ANIMALS | Michael Allen Fox | 3 Animal L. 25 (1997) | This article extends Gary Francione's analysis of these concepts from Rain without Thunder within the context of animal experimentation. Michael argues that Francione's work leads us to the conclusion that the notions of necessary and unnecessary suffering are empty of meaning, and no significant difference exists between them. That humans cause animals to suffer in abundance is reality. That their suffering is necessary in order to fulfill human purposes is fantasy. |
| State Animal Anti-Cruelty Statutes: An Overview | Pamela D. Frasch | 5 Animal L. 69 (1999) |
This article provides an introduction to the current status of state animal anti-cruelty laws throughout the United States. Extensive exploration of the similarities and differences between these statutes, combined with detailed statutory citations, enables this article to serve as a useful resource for research and statistical purposes. Additionally, the article offers an opportunity to review many of the provisions contained within these anti- cruelty statutes and to identify those in need of improvement. |
| STATE ANIMAL ANTI-CRUELTY STATUTES: AN OVERVIEW | Pamela D. Frasch, Stephan K. Otto, Kristen M. Olsen, and Paul A. Ernest | 5 Animal L. 69 (1999) | This article provides an introduction to the current status of state animal anti-cruelty laws throughout the United States. Extensive exploration of the similarities and differences between these statutes, combined with detailed statutory citations, enables this article to serve as a useful resource for research and statistical purposes. Additionally, the article offers an opportunity to review many of the provisions contained within these anti-cruelty statutes and to identify those in need of improvement. |
| Canned Hunts: Unfair at Any Price | Fund for Animals | http://fund.org/library/documentViewer.asp?ID=338&table=documents |
This article explores the issues surrounding "canned hunts." Section I provides an introduction and overview; explores the ethical objections to canned hunts based on standards generally accepted by the sport hunting community; raises questions about the appropriate legal analogy that should be applied to canned hunts; and discusses the serious animal health and public health issues raised by canned hunts. Section II catalogs the relevant statutes and regulations of each state with an example of a model ordinance relating to the regulation of canned hunts. |
| New Law to Ensure the Protection of Animals in Spain | Teresa Gimenez-Candela | Animal Legal & Historical Web Center |
This articles give an over view of the 2007 Spanish law for the protection of animals - In English. |
| New Law to Ensure the Protection of Animals in Spain | Teresa Gimenez-Candela | Animal Legal & Historical Center | Law 32/2007, of 7th November for the care of animals during their exploitation, transport, experimentation and sacrifice. The law is composed of a Preamble and is structured in three titles, and is completed by an additional provision and six final provisions. This Act provides, in compliance with the European Community mandate, a set of principles on the care of animals and a schedule of offences and penalties that gives legal effect to the obligations under current regulations. The Act also provides the foundation for the system of penalties. This is accomplished by establishing a common denominator policy under which the autonomous local communities may exercise their powers. That common denominator guarantees the consistency necessary for the operation of the applicable rules and ensures a minimum proportionality in the sanctions. |
| The Historical and Contemporary Prosecution and Punishment of Animals | Jen Girgen | 9 Animal L. 97 (2003) |
This article analyzes the role of the animal “offender,” by examining the animal trials and executions of years past. The writer argues that although the formal prosecution of animals as practiced centuries ago may have ended (for the most part), we continue to punish animals for their “crimes” against human beings. She suggests that we do this primarily to achieve two ends: the restoration of order and the achievement of revenge, and concludes with a call for a renewed emphasis on “due process” for animals threatened with punishment for their offenses. |
| Humane Education, Dissection, And The Law | Marcia Goodman Kramer | 13 Animal Law 281 (2007) |
Students regularly encounter animal dissection in education, yet humane education receives little attention in animal law. This article analyzes the status of humane education laws in the United States. It discusses the range of statutory protections, from student choice laws to bans on vivisection. The article then analyzes the litigation options for students who do not wish to dissect, including constitutional claims and claims arising under student choice laws. The article concludes by calling for additional legislation to protect students who have ethical objections to dissection. |
| Canadian Animal Anti-Cruelty Legislation | Charles Hall | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This paper examines the substance and history of animal anti-cruelty law in Canada. In doing so, it discusses the controversy surrounding the last amendments to the existing law (Bill C-50) introduced in parliament last year. |
| THE NATURE AND EFFECTS OF CONSTITUTIONAL STATE OBJECTIVES: ASSESSING THE GERMAN BASIC LAW’S ANIMAL PROTECTION CLAUSE | Claudia E. Haupt | 16 Animal L. 213 (2010) |
In 2002, an animal protection clause was added to Article 20a of the German Constitution. Designed as a state objective, the nature of the animal protection clause decidedly influences its application. As a state objective, it is directed at all three branches of government, and each branch must ensure within its sphere of competence the realization of the stated goal. The Federal Constitutional Court has yet to address the precise scope of the provision. This Article examines the likely future effects of the animal protection clause. With respect to the legislative branch, this Article addresses the question of whether the state objective demands that a standing provision be created for animal protection groups. With respect to the judicial and executive branches, this Article focuses on three fundamental rights that are most likely to come into conflict with animal protection: freedom of religion; freedom of teaching, science, and research; and freedom of artistic expression. Seismic shifts in constitutional adjudication are not likely to be expected. The provision does not give rights to animals. However, at a minimum, it prohibits circumventing the Animal Protection Act by construing that statute in light of the Constitution. The animal protection clause removed the disproportionality between certain fundamental rights and the interest in animal protection. It mandates a balancing of constitutional interests and eliminates doubts regarding the constitutionality of the Animal Protection Act, especially with respect to the fundamental rights discussed. |