An undercover video has been released by Mercy for Animals (MFA) showing abuses at a national pig farm. I think it’s especially important that this video is getting attention from a major news network. See the story here.
Analysis: Animal cruelty law in trouble
Tuesday, October 6th, 2009 11:29 am | Lyle Denniston |
Analysis
Congress’ attempt ten years ago to ban animal cruelty, by banning video and other depictions of it, had its first constitutional test in the Supreme Court Tuesday, and appeared to have failed. Despite efforts by an Obama Administration lawyer to show that Congress wrote carefully and narrowly, most of the Justices strongly implied that the law probably goes too far — or at least was so vague that no one can know just what is illegal. Only one Justice, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., seemed tempted to support the law as is.
The case of U.S. v. Stevens (08-769) tests the constitutionality of the 1999 law that made it a federal crime to make and sell commercially “any visual or auditory depiction” of killing or seriously abusing a living animal, if the conduct is illegal under either federal or a state’s law. [Disclosure: Akin Gump represents respondent Robert Stevens in the case, and blog contributor Patricia Millett argued on behalf of Mr. Stevens today. However, the author of this post operates independently of Akin Gump and is not involved in the firm's litigation.] The Justices, loosing a series of hypotheticals on what kind of conduct could not be depicted legally under the law – from bull-fighting to using geese to make foie gras, suggested that the statute likely would reach far beyond what Congress was actually seeking to ban.
Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal, asking the Court to reinstate the law that had been nullified by the Third Circuit Court, said Congress intended to shut down “a robust market” for so-called “crush videos,” images of small animals being stomped to death. It was, he said, a “narrowly targeted restriction.”
But he was only a few words into his opening when Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned whether Congress had any evidence that there was “such a robust market” for videos of dog-fighting or even of hunting. Katyal countered by stressing anew that the law was limited in scope, did not apply to hunting, and was a challenge only to the commercial market. That simply prompted Justice Antonin Scalia to say that applying it only to a “commercial market” was not to limit it, since that would embrace “anything sold.”
From then on, Scalia continued to assail the sweep of the law, and other Justices joined in the challenge. Scalia was so relentless that, when Patricia A. Millett, the lawyer speaking against the law, seemed to be leaving some opening for Congress to pass laws in this area, the Justice gave her a mini-lecture on “it is not up to the government to decide what our worst instincts are.” Millett had the most difficulty fending off questions from Justice Alito about whether Congress could write a law that would ban a TV channel devoted to “human sacrifice.”
In contrast to Katyal’s argument (seemingly one that made no discernible headway with the Court) that the law was a strictly limited one, Millett suggested that it would apply so widely that courts simply could not salvage it by trying to spell out what it did not cover. “You would have to excise so many things, I don’t know what you would have left,” she said.
Katyal had been challenged rigorously throughout his argument, but Millett did not encounter any serious pressure, until Justice Alito opted to join actively in the questioning.
Alito suggested that the law may have accomplished, over its decade on the books, just what Congress had in mind: it had dried up the market for “crush videos,” while not causing a decrease in videos or TV shows about hunting. He told Millett she should be addressing “what’s going on in the real world,” and not focus on hypotheticals like producing foie gras with geese. She replied that, if Congress were to write laws in the First Amendment area, it had to “write with a scalpel and not with a buzz saw.”
But she seemed less sure of her argument when Alito moved on to questions about Congress’ authority, hypothetically, to try to stop human sacrifice by banning its depiction on videos and in other media. She at first said that such a law might be valid if it were “properly drawn” and “narrowly tailored.” As other members of the Court showed some interest in the human sacrifice hypothetical, Millett made further concessions even while not answering directly. First Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and then Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., insisted on a direct response to Alito’s hypothetical. She answered that Congress could legislate in this area, unless it sought to ban the content of such depictions “just because it did not like it.”
A final decision in the case is not expected for at least several weeks.
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/analysis-animal-cruelty-law-in-trouble/
Many want duct-taped cat to find home, justice
By Peter Mucha
Inquirer Staff Writer
The news that a cat was found body-wrapped in duct tape spurred an outpouring of public support to the Pennsylvania SPCA yesterday.
The calls and emails brought clues about the culprit, claims of ownership, financial contributions, and offers of adoption, said spokeswoman Liz Williamson this morning.
Thanks to donations, the reward has been doubled to $2,000 for information leading to a conviction, she said.
Yesterday, dozens of tips were called into the animal cruelty hotline – 866-601-7722.
“There were a few leads that came through that were credible and substantial, and the humane officers were chasing those down yesterday,” she said.
A resident of the 2200 block of Edgley Street in North Philadelphia found the cat Tuesday afternoon.
The perpetrator could face 90 days in jail, and a fine up to $750 – unless the case is a repeat offense or is deemed to qualify as “torture,” Williamson said.
In that case, the offender could get a year in jail and a fine up to $2,500.
No arrest is imminent, though, Williamson added.
Several people phoned yesterday claiming to be the owner of “Sticky,” as workers at the North Philadelphia shelter nicknamed her.
Meetings will be set up soon to check out records and photographs that could verify someone’s claim, she said.
The shelter also received about $2,000 in donations in honor of Sticky, Williamson said.
Many other people called or emailed offering to adopt the cat, if the owner can’t be found.
But plenty of other pets – including some mistreated more than Sticky – are at the PSPCA hoping for a home, Williamson said.
To get started choosing, stop by a shelter or go to www.petfinder.com, she said.
The PSPCA’s 14 humane law enforcement officers, who have the power to execute warrants and make arrests, handle more than 6,000 animal-cruelty cases a year, Williamson said.
Meanwhile, Sticky seems to have weathered her ordeal nicely.
“She is continuing to do extremely well,” Williamson said. “She is getting a lot of love from everyone here.”
Filed under: SALDF | Tags: adoptable, animal abuse, dog, Hope, Noah's Arks Rescue, Texas
Sweet Angel HOPEThis incredibly sweet dog is an abuse case that was picked up by Animal Control in Longview, TX. She weighed 39 lbs. and was dragging a chain that weighed 20 lbs. She was handed over to the Humane Society of Northeast Texas. The Director of the Humane Society stepped up so she was not euthanized. By the grace of God, she survived the night and was taken to the vet where she is being treated. She is a beautiful 1 1/2 year old pit bull terrier. HOPE is being treated for hookworms, heartworms, you name it and that is in addition to being totally emaciated. The vets that are treating her just adore this sweet angel of a dog as does everyone that meets her. She was so abused that when food is put in front of her she will walk away from it if you are looking at her. She is getting more comfortable each day that she is there but has a long way to go. Let’s show this dog how much compassion there is left in this world and give her the life she so deserves. She has spent all her life chained and starved and who know what else has happened to her. Her life could have ended so many times based on how she looks but she has hung in there and we are not going to turn our backs on this innocent creature. Jennifer Smith President, Noah’s Arks Rescue (843) 987-0888 Please help us,
|
|||||
Filed under: SALDF | Tags: animal abuse, animal protection, breeders, California, dogfighting, legislation, Nava, Responsible Breeder Act of 2009
// 0 && navExists === false) {
// Grab all the links in the root navigation object
var navlist = root.getElementsByTagName(‘li’);
// Create an empty list where we’ll stuff all the top-level links
var navlinks = [];
// Loop through all the
for (var i=0; i < navlist.length; i++) {
// Grab all the hyperlinks
var links = navlist[i].getElementsByTagName('a');
// Loop through the hyperlinks
for (var j=0; j < links.length; j++) {
// And filter it down to only those that are in the 'mainNav' class
var cssClass = links[j].attributes['class'];
if (cssClass) {
if (cssClass.value === 'mainNav') {
// then add them to our list above
navlinks.push(links[j]);
}
}
}
}
// Loop through each link in the top-level nav
for (var x=0; x < navlinks.length; x++) {
var link = navlinks[x];
// Pull the href attribute
hlink = link.href;
// If the href attribute equals the starter URL
if (hlink == defaultTabPath) {
// Step up the DOM to the parent element
// And set highlight the element by changing the CSS
link.parentNode.attributes['class'].value ='navLink highlight';
// If it has a child
- , step down
- elements and find the lowerTabPath to highlight.
var listItems = nextUL[0].getElementsByTagName(‘li’);for (var i=0; i < navlist.length; i++) {
// Get the links
var links = navlist[i].getElementsByTagName('a');// Loop through the links
for (var j=0; j<!– BANNER AD
–>
L.A. Unleashed
All things animal in Southern
California and beyondAnimal protection bills await Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signature following the close of state legislative session
September 15, 2009 | 11:28 am
As California’s legislative session drew to a close last week, one big winner in the fight for animal-protection issues emerged: Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara), who introduced three bills that passed California state Assembly and Senate votes and now await Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signature.
The first, A.B. 241, is called “The Responsible Breeder Act of 2009″ and imposes a limit on the number of unsterilized dogs and cats an individual or business can have for the purposes of breeding for the pet market. (Don’t get hot under the collar, animal breeders — the “magic number” the bill would impose is 50, far more unaltered animals than any responsible breeder would ever consider having at one time. Even so, the American Kennel Club opposes the bill, offering a statement that read in part, “AKC believes that the quality of a breeder is not determined by the number of animals he has, but by the care the animals receive.”)
A.B. 241 applies only to adult animals (so puppies and kittens too young to be spayed or neutered don’t enter into the total) and the operative phrase in its text is “for sale” — so shelters, rescue groups and veterinary facilities would be exempted. Failure to comply, should the bill be enacted into law, would be a misdemeanor, and a window of time would be given for owners of more than 50 unaltered animals to either rehome the excess animals or have them spayed or neutered.
The second, A.B. 242, addresses the issue of dogfighting by substantially increasing the penalties for spectators caught attending fights. Current law provides a maximum sentence of 6 months of jail time and a $1,000 fine. A.B. 242 would double the maximum jail time and increase the maximum fine fivefold, making the maximum penalty, should it be enacted, one year in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Nava’s final animal-welfare bill, A.B. 243, would prevent those convicted of certain animal-abuse crimes from being able to own or care for other animals after their conviction. (Current law allows judges to impose a mandate preventing an offender from owning animals in the future, but Assemblyman Nava’s bill would require that this mandate be imposed for those convicted of certain crimes against animals.)
“We commend lawmakers in California for passing this raft of legislation to protect animals from cruelty and abuse, and especially Assemblyman Nava for his effective leadership,” Jennifer Fearing of the Humane Society of the United States said in a statement. “The anti-cruelty laws of a state are a reflection of our basic values and attitudes toward animals, and this collection of bills is a measurable step forward for the state of California.”
The three Nava bills — as well as a bill introduced by Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez which would outlaw the docking of cows’ tails; a bill introduced by Torrance-based Assemblyman Ted Lieu that would outlaw roadside and parking-lot sales of animals; and Montebello senator Ron Calderon’s bill which would authorize the seizure of property and profits from convicted dogfighters to be used for the purpose of benefiting abused dogs — next go to Gov. Schwarzenegger’s office for signature.
Another animal-related bill, S.B. 250, also known as the “Pet Responsibility Act,” failed to win passage. S.B. 250 would have required that California dogs — with the exception of service animals, hunting dogs and police dogs — either be spayed or neutered or face increased licensing fees. (S.B. 250 would also have required that free-roaming cats be spayed or neutered.) But Florez, who backed the bill, said his work on its behalf was far from over and announced he planned to reintroduce it early next year.
In a statement, Florez pointed to the spread of “untruths” as one reason S.B. 250 failed to pass an Assembly vote during the recently-expired legislative session. “No responsible pet owner has to worry that the ‘puppy police’ will come knocking at their door,” the statement continued, referring to a criticism that came from some who opposed it. “No one is going to force you to get your dog fixed if it gets out of the yard once. This bill is a tool for local animal control to use in dealing with irresponsible pet owners whose chronic disregard for the law is taking a financial and emotional toll on taxpayers, pet lovers and shelter workers.”
RELATED:
California legislature approves bid to ban tail-docking for cows
Pet Responsibility Act clears state Senate hurdle; bill would mandate spay/neuter for California dogs
Bills affecting farm animals make their way through California legislature– Lindsay Barnett
Photo: Assemblyman Pedro Nava (right) shakes hands with California State California Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico (D-Newark) after passing a solution to close the state’s budget gap July 24. Credit: Max Whittaker / Getty Images
var nextUL = link.parentNode.getElementsByTagName(‘ul’);
if (nextUL[0]) {
// And change the css on that
-
nextUL[0].attributes['class'].value = ‘level2 subStay’;
// Loop through the
Sometimes when you dress up your doggie, you can just TELL they HATE it! However, I used to put a tuxedo bow tie on my boxers and they KNEW they looked so handsome and loved it!
To respond to this article, I say let’s save our energy and go after the real animal abusers!
What do you think? Do you dress of your pets? Please share pictures if you do ;p
Read article here: http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2009/01/people_who_dress_up_their_dogs.html
Filed under: SALDF | Tags: animal abuse, horse breeder, horse racing, horses, New York
So many stories of animal abuse flooding in… 
Read the full story here.
A pet sitter was accused of animal abuse for letting a potbellied pig triple its weight. Read more here.
Filed under: SALDF | Tags: ALDF, animal abuse, Diva, Groucho, horses, Keatings, Lacy, neglect, North Carolina, Rain, Raven, River, Shadow, starvation, Twister, Wake County
As an animal advocate, no doubt you agree, no one has the right to abuse, exploit or neglect animals. That’s why the Animal Legal Defense Fund is taking Michael, Judy, and Gayle Keating to court for severely neglecting eight horses whom they starved – in one case, literally to death – and deprived of all veterinary care. ALDF is heading back to court on May 18th, and we need your support!It was the dead of winter and the grass was eaten down to the ground-there was no sign of edible hay anywhere on the Wake County, North Carolina property. The horses had even been eating bark off the trees in a desperate attempt to get something into their stomachs.
Lacy, a pregnant mare, was in such an advanced state of malnutrition and starvation that her hip bones, backbone and ribs were all protruding from her skin. River, Twister and Shadow were just babies and their suffering mothers, Rain, Diva and Raven, had been unable to provide them with enough milk to supply proper nutrition.
Upon learning of this dire situation from a concerned neighbor, authorities rescued the horses from the field where they were left to starve, and ALDF filed suit against the Keatings for permanent custody of the horses. We are happy to report that all of the surviving horses are recovering and safe, but we need your help to ensure that no other horses ever suffer at the hands of these abusers.
Despite the gross neglect of their horses and track record of abuse, by law there is currently nothing stopping the Keatings from owning – and endangering – other horses. While we feel confident we have a strong case against the defendants in urging the judge to ban them from animal ownership, we know that winning animal abuse cases can be difficult.
Help send our team of animal law experts to North Carolina to finish this fight and ensure that the Keatings are not given the chance to abuse any other animals – ever again. Your donation will help us ensure that the suffering of River, Diva, Twister, Shadow, Lacy, Groucho and Raven – and of Rain, who died of starvation before she could be rescued – was not in vain.
Thank you for your generous support and for all that you do on behalf of animals!
Sincerely,
Stephen Wells
Executive Director
Animal Legal Defense Fund
P.S. Meet the horses and read about the condition each was in when they were rescued.
Filed under: SALDF | Tags: animal abuse, dog fighting, jail, Michael Vick, update
Michael Vick will be finishing his sentence at home. Find more information here.
