Results
Displaying 5951 - 5960 of 6636
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 LEGISLATIVE REVIEW | Jenny Keatinge & Richard Myers | 17 Animal L. 415 (2011) |
This article gives a summary of important animal-related legislation from 2010. |
Article |
| 1999 STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS | Katharine Keaton and Deborah Maas | 6 Animal L. 153 (2000) | This is a review of state and federal legislation in 1999. | Article |
| A SHORT HISTORY OF (MOSTLY) WESTERN ANIMAL LAW: PART II | Thomas G. Kelch | 19 Animal L. 347 (2013) | This Article, presented in two parts, travels through animal law from ancient Babylonia to the present, analyzing examples of laws from the ancient, medieval, Renaissance and Enlightenment, recent modern, and modern historical periods. In performing this analysis, particular attention is focused on the primary motives and purposes behind these laws. What is discovered is that there has been a historical progression in the primary motives underlying animal laws in these different periods. In Part I of this Article, it was discovered that while economic and religious motives dominate the ancient and medieval periods, in the Renaissance and Enlightenment, we see social engineering—efforts to change human behavior—come to the fore. In this Part II of the Article, it is found that in the recent modern historical period we finally see protecting animals for their own sakes—animal protection—motivating animal law. In our present historical period, this Part II of the Article uncovers a movement towards what is defined as “scientific animal welfare”—the use of modern animal-welfare science as the inspiration for animal laws and regulations. Does this historical trend toward the use of modern science in making animal law portend a change that may transform our relationship with animals? Modern science tells us that many animals have substantial cognitive abilities and rich emotional lives, and this science would seem to lead us to question the use of animals in agriculture, experimentation, and entertainment altogether. It is ultimately concluded in this Part II of the Article, however, that only a very narrow science of animal welfare is actually being applied in modern animal-protection laws and regulations, one that proceeds from the premise that present uses of animals are legally, ethically, and morally appropriate. It is only in the future that the true implications of modern science may ever be translated into legal reality. | Article |
| CULTURAL SOLIPSISM, CULTURAL LENSES, UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES, AND ANIMAL ADVOCACY | Thomas G. Kelch | 31 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 403 | This article explores the cultural similarities and differences relating to the relationship between humans and animals in a globalized world. The article acknowledges that cultural differences in a globalized world can have a profound impact on the efficacy of advocacy for the benefit of animals. Attempts in one nation to provide protection for animals can have unintended consequences in our globalized world. The problem that then presents itself is, given the potpourri of human cultures and the need to take a global view of animal rights advocacy, how can animal rights advocates most efficiently and successfully advocate for animals? This article addresses that issue. | Article |
| A SHORT HISTORY OF (MOSTLY) WESTERN ANIMAL LAW: PART I | Thomas G. Kelch | 19 Animal L. 23 (2012) | This Article, presented in two parts, travels through animal law from ancient Babylonia to the present, analyzing examples of laws from the ancient, medieval, Renaissance and Enlightenment, recent modern, and modern historical periods. In performing this analysis, particular attention is focused on the primary motives and purposes behind these laws. What is discovered is that there has been a historical progression in the primary motives underlying animal laws in these different periods. While economic and religious motives dominate the ancient and medieval periods, in the Renaissance and Enlightenment we see social engineering—efforts to change human behavior—come to the fore. In the recent modern period, we finally see protecting animals for their own sakes, animal protection, motivating animal law. In our present historical period there is a movement towards what is defined as “scientific animal welfare”—the use of modern animal welfare science as the inspiration for animal laws and regulations. Does this historical trend toward use of modern science in making animal law portend a change that may transform our relationship with animals? Modern science tells us that many animals have substantial cognitive abilities and rich emotional lives, and this science would seem to lead us to question the use of animals in agriculture, experimentation, and entertainment altogether. It is ultimately concluded in this Article, however, that so far only a very narrow science of animal welfare is actually being applied in modern animal protection laws and regulations, one that proceeds from a premise that present uses of animals are legally, ethically, and morally appropriate. It is only in the future that the true implications of modern science may ever be translated into legal reality. | Article |
| Endangered Species Act Listing | Dirk Kempthorne | This press release announces listing polar bears as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. | Article | |
| A SLAVE BY ANY OTHER NAME IS STILL A SLAVE: THE TILIKUM CASE AND APPLICATION OF THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT TO NONHUMAN ANIMALS | Jeffrey S. Kerr, Martina Bernstein, Amanda Schwoerke, Matthew D. Strugar, Jared S. Goodman | 19 Animal L. 221 (2013) | On its face, the Thirteenth Amendment outlaws the conditions and practices of slavery and involuntary servitude wherever they may exist in this country—irrespective of the victim’s race, creed, sex, or species. In 2011, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, on behalf of five wild-captured orcas, sued SeaWorld for enslaving the orcas in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment. The case presented, for the first time, the question of whether the Thirteenth Amendment’s protections can extend to nonhuman animals. This Article examines the lawsuit’s factual, theoretical, and strategic underpinnings, and argues that the district court’s opinion ultimately dismissing the suit failed to address the critical issues that animated this case of first impression: Who “counts” as a legal person for the purposes of law? Is it time to recognize nonhuman animals as legal persons, based on progressing scientific and normative views? What principles underlie the Thirteenth Amendment? When and how does the application of the Constitution expand? Can the meaning of the Constitution evolve to encompass the interests of nonhuman animals? Drawing on the United States Supreme Court’s long history of evolving constitutional interpretation, this Article presents four theories of constitutional change, under which the meanings of “slavery” and “involuntary servitude” are expansive enough to include nonhuman animals. Despite the district court’s decision, the case can be properly viewed as the first step toward the legal recognition that the Thirteenth Amendment protects the rights of nonhuman animals to be free from bondage. | Article |
| 2002 Legislative Review | Emilie Keturakis | 9 Animal L. 331 (2003) |
This article provides an overview of animal-related legislation from 2002. |
Article |
| For Trinkets, Tonics, And Terrorism: International Wildlife Poaching In The Twenty-First Century | Ranee Khooshie Lal Panjabi | 43 Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 1 | This article looks at international wildlife poaching in the 21st century. | Article |
| Dog Meat in Korea: A Socio-Legal Challenge | Rakhyun E. Kim | 14 Animal Law 201 (2007) |
This article explores the dog meat debate in Korea from a socio-legal perspective. It first examines the legal status of dogs and dog meat, and the legal protection for dogs under the old and new legislative frameworks. It then discusses socio-legal challenges to banning dog meat in the Korean context, employing examples of both legal approaches taken by other countries and the politics of dog meat in Korea, specifically. The article argues that the controversy over dog meat must be reframed and dog meat be socially redefined in order to protect dogs, which are currently caught in the conflict over their socio-legal status as companion and livestock animals. |
Article |