Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| FREE SPEECH, ANIMAL LAW, AND FOOD ACTIVISM | Howard F. Lyman | 5 Animal L. i (1999) | Howard Lyman discusses a case that provides an example of using the law to force activists to use their scarce resources in court to defend the right of free speech. |
| Pawing Open the Courthouse Door: Why Animals' Interests Should Matter | Lauren Magnotti | 80 St. John's L. Rev. 455 (Winter 2006) |
It is widely accepted that animals are viewed as property under the law. It is equally apparent, however, that animals are much more than the average inanimate piece of personal property. The law of standing should reflect that animals are creatures with interests worthy of legal protection in their own right. Thus, while the courts may inevitably continue to recognize animals as property, animals are qualitatively different and the courts can and must take this into consideration when deciding the issue of standing. |
| ZUCHTVIEH-EXPORT GMBH v. STADT KEMPTEN: THE TENSION BETWEEN UNIFORM, CROSS-BORDER REGULATION AND TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY | David Mahoney | 40 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 363 (2017) | In Zuchtvieh-Export GmbH v. Stadt Kempten, the European Court of Justice ruled that a European Council regulation that protects animal welfare during transport applies to the stages of a journey outside of the European Union (EU), if that journey commenced within the EU. This ruling by the European Court of Justice has been praised as it improves animal transport conditions outside of the EU. However, transport companies and governments outside of the EU are less welcoming of the ruling. The ruling highlights the difficulty in determining when and how such a regulation should be applied abroad. It also raises the broader question of striking a balance between efficient and uniform regulation across borders and maintaining territorial sovereignty. As a solution to the issues raised in Zuchtvieh-Export, this Comment suggests the use of bilateral international agreements, which would reduce conflict between nations by protecting territorial sovereignty. |
| The (Inter)national Strategy: An Ivory Trade Ban In The United States And China | Morgan V. Manley | 38 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1511 | This Note argues that a near-complete ban in ivory trade not only raises difficult domestic legal issues, but also does little to stop elephant poaching in Africa. Further, enacting a similar ban in China is not only unrealistic, but also would increase the illegal trade and, therefore, the slaughter of elephants in Africa. Part I explains the history of illegal ivory trade and describes the current legal environments in the United States and China. Part II presents the domestic legal and policy implications of an ivory ban, and analyzes the potential difficulties with implementing a similar ban in China. Part III argues that while the United States should stringently regulate the domestic ivory market, a near-complete ban is unreasonable. Further, a similar ban in China is not a practical solution; Chinese officials must consider strategies to optimize existing laws and gain public support. |
| 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. |
| Swan Song? Giving a Voice to Mute Swans in the Chesapeake Bay | Michael Markarian and Jonathan R. Lovvorn Esq. | 11 U. Balt. J. Envtl. L. 115 (Spring, 2004) |
This article discusses the decision by the United States District Court to grant an injunction filed by the Fund for Animals to stop the killing of the federally protected mute swan. The authors suggest that more research needs to be conducted with regard to alleged harm the swans cause in the Chesapeake Bay. Moreover, alternatives to culling the population must be explored as this is required by multiple federal laws. Further, the authors suggest that we should not not blame the very species we introduced centuries ago or artificially arrest the natural progression of the various species in an ecosystem, be they native or exotic. |
| LIVE FREE OR DIE: ON THEIR OWN TERMS: BRINGING ANIMAL-RIGHTS PHILOSOPHY DOWN TO EARTH BY LEE HALL | Joel Marks | 17 Animal L. 243 (2010) |
This book review examines Lee Hall’s new book, which presents an innovative animal rights theory: wild animals, due to their autonomous nature, are endowed with rights, but domesticated animals lack rights because they are not autonomous. With that theory in mind, Hall outlines ideas about how humans are obligated to treat both wild and domestic animals. Hall first argues that the rights of wild animals require that humans let them alone. Yet, despite the fact that domestic animals lack rights under Hall’s theory, Hall argues that humans are required to care for them because it is humans who brought them into existence. While the reviewer believes that Hall’s theory is indeed innovative and appealing, he ultimately concludes that it cannot explain why domestic animals completely lack rights and that the implications of the theory for how they are to be treated are unsatisfactory. |
| THE KITTLES CASE AND ITS AFTERMATH | Joshua Marquis | 2 Animal L. 197 (1996) | This article was adapted from remarks from Joshua Marquis at a symposium held by the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund of Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark College on September 23, 1995 regarding issues affecting domestic and captive animals. |
| The Price of Fame: CITES Regulation and Efforts Towards International Protection of the Great White Shark | Julie B. Martin | 39 Geo. Wash. Int'l L. Rev. 199 (2007) |
After several failed attempts, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) passed a proposal in October of 2004 to increase trade restrictions on the Great White Shark (white shark), also known as carcharodon carcharias, by placing it on Appendix II of its list of protected species. Trade in Appendix II species is restricted by the requirement that states parties issue export permits for all specimens or parts of specimens on the list. The adoption of this proposal is controversial among CITES member nations because of high market demands for white shark products. Although research on white sharks is limited due in part to the elusive nature of the species, all available research indicates that the population of white sharks is decreasing; in some areas the decline is in large, possibly unsustainable, numbers. This population decrease is particularly alarming because market demand remains a powerful motivation for continued depletion. |
| RECONCILING THE MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT WITH EXPANDING WIND ENERGY TO KEEP BIG WHEELS TURNING AND ENDANGERED BIRDS FLYING | Robert J. Martin & Rob Ballard | 20 Animal L. 145 (2013) | The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) has proven invaluable in minimizing the destruction of the 240 avian species listed by its enforcement agency, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), as “endangered or threatened” or “birds of conservation concern.” Recently, however, the Act is faced with a new challenge: How can it continue to achieve its objective when a highly desirable domestic source of sustainable energy—wind power—is experiencing unprecedented growth? Ever-larger wind projects propelled by giant turbines have become a serious danger to the existence of migratory birds and their natural habitats. Yet most policy makers strongly welcome and support continued expansion of wind power, and are reluctant to permit impediments to halt or restrict its growth. The growing conflict between the goals of protecting migratory birds and producing more wind power should be reconciled. This Article proposes three basic policy revisions: (1) authorization for the FWS to issue incidental take permits to wind power developers; (2) creation of a uniform standard for assessing avian impacts; and (3) amendment of the MBTA to allow for civil sanctions and citizen suits. Although “big wheels in the sky” must keep on turning and expanding to help reduce America’s dependence on fossil fuels and foreign energy sources, this worthy objective must be pursued without weakening federal protection of migratory birds. |