Results
Title |
Author | Citation | Alternate Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act: Deficiencies and Proposed Amendments | Jennifer L. Mariucci | 4 Journal of Animal Law 149 (2008) |
This note touches on the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and the deficiencies in the current version that undermine the statute’s intended purpose of ensuring a humane slaughter for all animals. This note analyzes the statute, compares it to comparable statutes from around the world, and suggests alterations to ensure that the statue fulfills its goal. This note also includes proposed statutory language that implements suggested changes. |
Article | |
| The Humane Research and Testing Act: Advancing Science by Creating | Paul A. Locke, Mikalah Singer and Thomas Hartung | ALTEX 38(4), 2021 | This letter examines the proposed alternatives to animals in biomedical research and the Humane Research and Testing Act (HRTA) from 2021. | Article | |
| The Humane Society of the United States, et al v. Mike Johanns, et al |
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and for a Preliminary Injunction, and Request for a Hearing requesting that the Court, “temporarily and preliminarily enjoi[n] and declar[e] unlawful a Final Rule just promulgated by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (“FSIS”) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) that creates a “fee-for-service” inspection system designed to facilitate the continued transport and slaughter of American horses for human consumption abroad.” In an memorandum opinion, the court denied plaintiff's motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction because it found that plaintiffs do not demonstrate the factors necessary for the court to issue a preliminary injunction. |
Pleading | |||
| The Humane Society of the United States, Plaintiff v. Amazon.com, Inc., JOHN DOE d/b/a UNDERGROUND, PITBULL BREEDERS ASSOCIATION | The Plaintiff The Humane Society of the United States filed this complaint alleging unlawful trade practices pursuant to the Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”), D.C. CODE ANN. § 28-3904. This action for statutory penalties and appropriate injunctive relief arises from Defendants’ purposeful marketing, sale, and shipment of graphic dog fighting videos and cockfighting magazines in violation of federal criminal prohibitions and District of Columbia animal welfare laws. The videos and magazines depict and/or describe actual animal cruelty, as well as animal fights staged for the purposes of: (1) producing and selling more copies of the videos for commercial gain; and (2) unlawfully promoting the criminal enterprises of dog fighting and cockfighting. In particular, the magazines contain hundreds of criminal solicitations and feature advertisements for fighting birds, fighting dogs, and other contraband that render them unlawful under the following statutory schemes: federal Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2132 et seq .; the federal Depiction of Animal Cruelty Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 48; the D.C. Cruelty to Animals Statute, D.C. CODE ANN. §§ 22-1015(a)(1), (a)(5); the federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371; and the D.C. conspiracy law, D.C. CODE ANN. § 22-1805a(a). | Pleading | |||
| The Hunt Club | Hunt Club | http://www.huntingtop10.com/outfitters/il/ilof3/index.html |
This advertisement for "The Hunt Club" indicates it provides lodging, meals, and hunts of waterfowl and big game on its 16,000 preserve. It also adds that it has a "trophy management policy" with regard to hunts of "trophy" deer on a 4,000 acre archery area. |
Article | |
| The Inadequate Protection of ANnimals Against Cruel Animal Husbandry Practices Under United States Law | Nicole Fox | 17 Whittier L. Rev. 145 |
This article looks at available legal protections for all farmed animals, and recommends that Congress enact stricter animal welfare laws. |
Article | |
| THE INJUSTICE OF ANIMAL WELFARE: A REVIEW OF ANIMALS, PROPERTY, AND THE LAW | Priscilla N. Cohn | 2 Animal L. 207 (1996) | This article provides a review of the book "Animals, Property, and the Law." | Article | |
| THE INJUSTICE OF ANIMAL WELFARE: A REVIEW OF ANIMALS, PROPERTY, AND THE LAW | Priscilla N. Cohn | 2 Animal L. 207 (1996) | This article provides a review of the book "Animals, Property, and the Law" by Gary Francione regarding the differences between animal rights and animal welfare. | Article | |
| The International Fund for Animal Welfare (Australia) Pty Ltd and Minister for Environment and Heritage | (2005) 93 ALD 594 | (2005) 41 AAR 508; [2005] AATA 1210 |
Zoos in New South Wales and Victoria sought to import asian elephants for conservation and exhibition. The Tribunal considered whether the elephants were being imported "for the purposes of conservation breeding or propagation", the zoos were "suitably equipped to manage, confine and care for the animals, including meeting the behavioural and biological needs of the animals", the importation of the elephants would "be detrimental to, or contribute to trade which is detrimental to ... the survival .... or ... recovery in nature of" Asian elephants and whether the elephants were "obtained in contravention of, [or] their importation would ... involve the contravention of, any law". The importation was allowed. |
Case | |
| The Japanese Dolphin Hunts: In Quest Of International Legal Protection For Small Cetaceans | Rachelle Adam | 14 Animal Law 133 (2007) |
This article sets out to explore the international legal status of those dolphins targeted by the Japanese drive hunts. It is estimated that over 2,500 small cetaceans—dolphins, porpoises, and small whales—will be killed as a result of the drive hunt, out of a total of over twenty thousand killed annually in Japan by direct catch. Since humans have literally pushed dolphins to the brink of extinction, humans have an ethical duty to stop the cruelty perpetrated against them and to ensure the survival of their species. This ethical duty should be turned into an international legal duty, with a correlated legal right for dolphins to international protection. |
Article |