Full Title Name:  Tilikum’s Splash: Lessons Learned From Animal Rights-Based Litigation Strategies

Summary: The animal advocacy movement is divided between those who believe in animal welfare and those who believe in animal rights. Although these two factions of the animal advocacy movement hold the overall goal of making the lives of animals better, practical differences do arise in the way in which these two factions litigate animal issues to achieve this goal. This Note explores Tilikum ex rel. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Sea World Parks & Entertainment, a case in which five orca whales "sued" Sea World for violating their Thirteenth Amendment right to be free from slavery and involuntary servitude. The case received widespread publicity as it was the first time a U.S. federal court had been asked to determine whether the Thirteenth Amendment to the United affords protection to non-humans. The Tilikum case departed from the traditional model of litigating animal issues by utilizing what this Article deems an animal rights-based litigation strategy. This Note first provides an overview of the traditional animal welfare-based model of litigating animal issues. This Note then analyzes the Tilikum litigation strategy to show how it departed from the traditional animal welfare-based model. Additionally, this Note weighs the advantages of both litigation strategies, ultimately recommending that animal advocacy organizations not depart from the animal-welfare based litigation strategies. Finally, this Note explores the theoretical possibility of expanding legal rights to animals based upon the expansion of legal rights to other non-human entities, such as corporations.