PETA Seeks Constitutional Slavery Protection For Animals
Posted: February 6th, 2012 | Author: M.Aaron Silverman | Filed under: News, Revolute | Tags: Orca, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, PETA, SeaWorld, Slavery | Comments Off
In what is reported to be the first case of its kind, a court in the United States has heard a case which is examining whether animals are entitled to be protected from slavery. The case brought by animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – PETA – centres on a group of whales at the Sea World amusement park in California. The five whales live at the Sea World where they perform for crowds, but PETA argues that the whales are in effect slaves, and they should be freed as the US constitution demands. It is reportedly the first time ever an American court has heard legal arguments over whether animals could enjoy the same constitutional protections as humans.
Sea World’s lawyers argue that the case has no merit because the US constitution was referring to humans, not animals, when its provisions forbidding slavery were written. A US federal judge has heard arguments in the case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller called the hearing in San Diego after Sea World asked the court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that names five orcas as plaintiffs in the case. PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves for being forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego and Orlando.
“It’s a new frontier in civil rights,” said Jeffrey Kerr, PETA’s attorney, who described the hearing as a historic day. “Slavery does not depend on the species of the slave any more than it depends on race, gender or ethnicity,” he argued. “Coercion, degradation and subjugation characterize slavery and these orcas have endured all three.”
PETA’s complaint says the five killer whales are represented by “friends” at PETA who include three former killer whale trainers, a marine biologist, and the founder of an organization that seeks to protect orcas.
PETA’s complaint demands that the court “appoint a legal guardian to effectuate plaintiffs’ transfer from defendants’ facilities to a suitable habitat in accordance with each plaintiff’s individual needs and best interests.” Sea World’s motion to dismiss argues that, the amendment “only protects people, not animals, from slavery and involuntary servitude.” The courts lack authority to extend the amendment to animals, which could “open a veritable Pandora’s Box of inescapable problems and absurd consequences,” Sea World argued in motion to dismiss last year.
Sea World’s attorney Theodore Shaw called the lawsuit a waste of the court’s time and resources. He said it defies common sense and goes against 125 years of case law applied to the Constitution’s 13th amendment that prohibits slavery between humans.
“With all due respect, the court does not have the authority to even consider this question,” Shaw said, adding later: “Neither orcas nor any other animal were included in the `We the people’ when the Constitution was adopted.”
District Judge Jeffrey Miller listened to both sides for an hour before announcing that he would take the case under advisement and issue his ruling at a later date. The judge raised doubts a court can allow animals to be plaintiffs in a lawsuit, and he questioned how far the implications of a favorable ruling could reach, pointing out the military’s use of dolphins and scientists’ experiments on whales in the wild.
Kerr acknowledged PETA faces an uphill battle but he said he was hopeful after Monday’s hearing. ”This is an historic day,” Kerr said. “For the first time in our nation’s history, a federal court heard arguments as to whether living, breathing, feeling beings have rights and can be enslaved simply because they happen to not have been born human. By any definition these orcas have been enslaved here.”
The issue is not about whether the animals have been subjected to abuse, the defense said. If the court were to grant orcas constitutional rights, Shaw warned the ruling would have profound implications that could impact everything from the way the U.S. government uses dogs to sniff out bombs and drugs to how zoos and aquariums operate.
“We’re talking about hell unleashed,” PETA’s attorney, Jeffrey Kerr said.
PETA said a ruling in its favor would only help to protect the orcas in the entertainment industry and other cases involving animals would have to be decided on their own merits.
Kerr said Sea World employees are in violation of the 13th amendment because their conduct is enslaving an intelligent, highly social species that suffers from its confinements in ways similar to what humans would experience. Brushing animals off as property is the same argument that was used against African-Americans and women before their constitutional rights were protected.
Shaw pointed out that PETA’s argument does not translate because both women and African-Americans are people for which the Constitution was written to protect. Sea World denied any implications of cruelty to animals, instead accusing PETA of trying to get attention for itself with its lawsuit.
“While PETA continued to engage in this publicity stunt, Sea World San Diego was returning four rescued and rehabilitated sea lions to the wild,” Sea World said in its response. ”Sea World remains the standard for zoological stewardship of marine animals and we reject any challenge to the conditions and quality of care for these remarkable animals,” Sea World said.
The welfare of our whales is enshrined in numerous federal and state laws, including the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Animal Welfare Act. Judge Jeffrey Miller did not specify when he would issue his ruling.
source: PETA
source: SeaWorld
RELATED:
Australian Seaworld Imprisoning Dolphins, PETA Says
