As of April 2011, 47 states had elevated certain animal cruelty crimes from misdemeanors to felonies. Animal law is now taught in America’s top 10 law schools—and 100 others. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is suing SeaWorld on behalf of five orcas. Spain’s parliament has approved a resolution that the great apes have the right to life, liberty, and freedom from physical and psychological torture. Do dogs and cats? Should they at least have limited rights as beings under a guardian’s protection, or as “living property”? We asked four lawyers and animal advocates for their take on these issues.
Michael A. Kahn
Principal, The BrickHouse Law Group
“The dog lover in me says yes. The lawyer hears the rumblings of the so-called slippery slope. If dogs and cats, what about hamsters and parrots and my neighbor’s beloved pet iguana? And what kind of rights? Surely not liberty and freedom. Happiness? OK, but does that include an enforcement right? The late Justice William O. Douglas argued in a famous dissent that trees and rivers and other inanimate objects should have standing to sue. What about the animate object at the foot of your bed? Should some lawyer, on behalf of your Labrador retriever, be able to sue you for slander because you shouted “Bad dog!” at him in a public park?”
Randy Grim
Founder, Stray Rescue
“It always boils down to money for those who think animals should have no rights. I don’t even feel comfortable talking about ‘owning’ animals. That language was legally changed in the city of St. Louis a few years ago, from ‘owner’ to ‘guardian’—moving us away from the mind-set that living creatures are property without rights, objects we can mistreat or discard. People who make a profit off of companion animals will never want to see the
day that a guardian could sue for more than the ‘property value.’ But a dog isn’t a TV,
and if he dies prematurely because of the negligence of a reckless vet, compensation
should be more than the $75 adoption fee. They killed my best friend.”
Deirdre C. Gallagher
Partner, Foley & Mansfield
“I think that these propositions—for example, ascribing rights to animals—are given birth because of frustration with a system that doesn’t enforce the laws that are on (or need to be on) the books. It has been my personal experience that prosecutors usually aren’t fired up about prosecuting animal cases (although this is changing), particularly in rural areas. Otherwise we wouldn’t have puppy mills, now would we? We need to regulate man’s inhumanity to the animal kingdom—not make the animal kingdom part of ours.”
Denny Mertz
Chesterfield Farmer and Board Member, Missouri Farm Bureau
“The question can best be answered by highlighting the main differences between animal-welfare advocates and animal-rights activists. Animal-welfare advocates recognize human ownership and the humane use of animals as legitimate, based on the traditional principle that man has supremacy over animals. Animal-rights activists seek an end to the treatment of animals as property and demand that pets and livestock be treated as members of the moral community and have the same rights as people, a position that most livestock and pet owners find contrary to their fundamental beliefs.”
