Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| ". . . und die tiere" Constitutional Protection for Germany's Animals | Kate M. Nattrass | 10 Animal L. 283 (2004) | In the summer of 2002, Germany welcomed animals into the folds of constitutional protection. With the addition of the words “and the animals,” Germany became the first country in the European Union (“E.U.”), and the second on the European continent, to guarantee the highest level of federal legal protection to its nonhuman animals. Though a welcomed development in the eyes of most Germans, this groundbreaking event received very little attention on the world stage. Common misconceptions about the ramifications of the constitutional amendment resulted in limited to no accurate representation in worldwide media. Likewise, international policymakers and animal protectionists have shown little awareness of this development and its potential implications. In addition to possible legal effects, the social implications of such an occurrence in a major western country are vast. International leaders will certainly take note as the effects of this change begin to take place in Germany’s laws and, increasingly, in its international policies. More importantly, the global animal protection community should take note of what is possible, and what can be learned from the achievements of Germany’s animal protection community. This study traces the legal and social developments leading to Germany’s constitutional amendment which provides protection to animals, showing how this legal highpoint was achieved. Multiple sources are used, including congressional, judicial, and party doc uments, press releases, international media reports, personal communication with leaders in four major German animal protection organizations, interviews with a key Ministry official, and published materials. This study will also critically assess the claims of the animal protection and opposition communities in order to predict where German animal law is going and what effects this change will have on the treatment of animals both within Germany and internationally. Concluding thoughts will address how the international animal protection community can understand this legal victory in a constructive context. |
| "DO DOGS APE?" OR "DO APES DOG?" AND DOES IT MATTER? BROADENING AND DEEPENING COGNITIVE ETHOLOGY | Marc Bekoff | 3 Animal L. 13 (1997) | This article is a brief discussion of some aspects of Marc Bekoff's research that bear on animal sentience and animal protection. First he considers how the comparative study of animal minds informs discussions of animal exploitation, then he discusses how humans interfere, often unknowingly, in the lives of wild animals. It doesn't matter whether "dogs ape" or "apes dog" when taking into account the worlds of different animals. |
| "It's the Right Thing to Do": Why the Animal Agriculture Industry Should Not Oppose Science-Based Regulations Protecting the Welfare Of Animals Raised for Food | Angela J. Geiman | 106 Mich. L. Rev. First Impressions 128 (2008) | The purpose of this commentary is to respond to the question, “Should laws criminalizing animal abuse apply to animals raised for food?” The simple answer to the question is “yes,” but the reality is not simple. It requires analyzing both the science of raising livestock and the current legal framework, which we must understand before discussing what to require and how to implement those requirements. Continued improvements in the livestock and meatpacking industries and the rising expectations of consumers add to the complexity of the issue. |
| "World Leader" - At What Price? A Look at Lagging American Animal Protection Laws | Stephanie J. Engelsman | 22 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 329 (Fall, 2005) |
This paper will begin in showing that the United States has done virtually nothing to ensure that all creatures are free from unnecessary pain and suffering. This paper will then explore what other developed countries have done towards protecting nonhuman animals in the same amount of time. This paper in no way suggests that any of the countries to be discussed have solved the problem of animal exploitation; however it does suggest that many of those countries have at least begun to make a legitimate and concerted effort towards protecting animals from human greed. |
| 2006 Animal Law-Related Articles | Brett Cattani | 13 Animal Law 329 (2007) |
This document provides a listing of animal-related law review and journal articles from 2006. |
| A Brief History of Animal Law, Part II (1985 – 2011) | Joyce Tischler | 5 Stan. J. Animal L. & Pol'y 27 (2012) | This article traces the growth of the field of animal law from 1985 to the present. It tracks the effort by attorneys and law students in the United States and abroad to institutionalize animal law classes, scholarly conferences, animal law sections in state, local, and regional bar associations, as well as the American Bar Association. It provides a review of efforts to spearhead lawsuits, legislative enactments, initiatives, and other means to gain greater protections for animals. Section II of the article describes the development of an institutional structure in various sectors of the legal community. Section III presents a review of landmark lawsuits and legislation. The article concludes with a summary of the major lessons that have been learned. |
| A Call to Action: Concrete Proposals for Reducing Widespread Animal Suffering | Dana M. Campbell | 15 Animal L. 141 (2008) |
This article details the legal work currently being done to prevent animal cruelty as well as suggestions for future goals. |
| A Contractarian View of Animal Rights: Insuring Against the Possibility of Being a Non-Human Animal | Julie Hilden | 14 Animal Law 5 (2007) |
Contemporary research regarding non-human animals’ intelligence, emotional life, and capacity for reciprocity strongly suggests the need for a sweeping re-evaluation of their legal status as mere property. In this essay, the author will contend that the contractarian theory of philosopher John Rawls provides an ideal basis for this re-evaluation. |
| A Dubious Grail: Seeking Tort Law Expansion and Limited Personhood as Stepping Stones Toward Abolishing Animals' Property Status | Richard L. Jr. Cupp | 60 SMU L. Rev. 3 (2007) |
Many animal rights legal advocates are seeking more manageable steps that may someday lead to the elimination or modification of property status. This Article critiques such efforts, specifically focusing on two potential stepping stones that may be perceived as particularly desirable for animal rights activists: seeking limited personhood for intelligent species of animals, such as chimpanzees; and the possible expansion of tort law to provide animals standing as plaintiffs whose interests are represented by court-appointed humans. This Article will analyze Steven Wise's work in Rattling the Cage and Drawing the Line, advocating limited personhood for some animal species, and David Favre's proposals in A New Tort, as illustrative of efforts at incremental movement toward animal rights and the abolition or modification of property status for animals. |
| A Review of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions | Laura Ireland Moore | 11 Animal L. 311 (2005) |
In this article, Ms. Ireland Moore reviews the book, A Review of Animal Rights: Current Debates and Directions. |