Supreme Court Calls Animal Cruelty Law Too Broad

by Nina Totenberg, NPR April 20, 2010

Editor's note: NPR joined other news organizations in filing a brief in this case arguing that the statute was unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a federal law banning photos, videos and other depictions of animal cruelty.

By an 8-to-1 vote, the court said the law violates the First Amendment right of free speech.

Enacted in 1999, the law was aimed at "crush videos." These videos of women in high heels crushing small animals, like mice and kittens, are apparently a sexual fetish for some people. The law, however, has broad language. It makes it a crime to possess or sell any depiction of animal cruelty -- specifically the killing, wounding, torturing or mutilation of an animal -- if the conduct is illegal in the place where the prosecution is brought.

Enter Robert Stevens, a pit bull lover or exploiter, depending on who is telling the story. He did not make any dogfighting films or stage any fights. Instead, he compiled films made by others, films of pit bulls fighting, mainly in Japan, where it is legal. Stevens sold the films commercially. His critics said he was exploiting dogfighting for profit. He denies that, saying his videos are part of his educational work on the breed.

"My genre ... was not to sensationalize and show bloody, gory stuff," he said, explaining that he had edited out the bloody scenes, but wanted to show the "gladiator" tendencies of pit bulls.

In more than 10 years, Stevens was the only person prosecuted under the animal cruelty law. The Virginia resident was convicted in Pennsylvania and sentenced to three years in prison. But on Tuesday, the Supreme Court threw out his conviction and declared the law unconstitutional.

Writing for the eight-member court majority, Chief Justice John Roberts first tackled the government's assertion that a law can ban any category of speech if Congress deems that category not "worthy" of protection under the First Amendment guarantee of free expression. The government's assertion, said the chief justice, is "startling and dangerous."

Yes, said Roberts, the court has long held that certain categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment -- child pornography, obscenity and fraud, for instance -- but, he said, that does not mean that the court has "freewheeling authority to declare new categories of speech outside the scope of the First Amendment."

In this case, the court continued, Congress used language of such "alarming breadth" that it would make it a crime to sell hunting videos in the District of Columbia, where hunting is illegal.

The court also said that the various exceptions Congress wrote into the law -- for "serious" scientific, journalistic or artistic work -- could not save the statute. After all, the justices said, hunting videos don't fit any of the categories protected from prosecution, since these videos are generally considered "entertainment."

The court declined to say whether Congress could in the future write a statute that would be sufficiently targeted at crush videos. But Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, is urging Congress to try.

"We really do believe that Congress can find a way to pass a law that forbids illegal acts of animal cruelty and that will pass constitutional muster," Pacelle said. He said Congress could specifically exempt hunting and fishing from the animal cruelty ban.

But hunting and fishing enthusiasts, like Laurie Lee Dovey, executive director of the Professional Outdoor Media Association, are doubtful that would be enough.

"I don't believe there can be" such a law, Dovey said. "We must in America rely on our First Amendment rights to speak freely and to discuss things that are not comfortable to discuss. That's what makes us America."

The lone dissenter in Tuesday's ruling was Justice Samuel Alito, who charged that the "practical effect" of the court's ruling would be to legalize "a form of depraved entertainment."

The court's decision not only stuck down a law enacted by Congress, but it also delivered a rather pointed rebuke to two individuals. First, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a top contender for the U.S. Supreme Court, whose brief on behalf of the Obama administration was thoroughly repudiated in the strongest terms.

Gene Schaerr, who filed a brief on the other side for the libertarian Cato Institute, said if Kagan supervised the writing of the brief she signed, "I would agree that it does seem to raise questions about her judgment."

The other loser was former federal prosecutor Mary Beth Buchanan, now a Republican candidate for Congress in Pennsylvania. Her decision to bring the Stevens case, the court said, was evidence the government could not be trusted to act responsibly.

Related article: Amicus Briefs filed in United States v. Stevens

4-H The Latest Battleground Over Animal Care

04/11/2010 by By Gary Truitt, Hoosier Ag Today

The 4-H program is one of the best youth leadership development organizations in the world. Now I admit I am biased, being a 4H leader and having two of my children go through the program. So I guess that is why my green clover turned red when I learned that the National 4-H organization had climbed in bed with one of the most radical and insidious animal rights organizations in the country. Furthermore, when this issue came to light and the farm community expressed outrage, the National leadership refused to back down. This continued association has allowed the Humane Society of the United States to use the name and reputation of 4-H to advance its radical agenda. Despite demands from local and state 4-H leaders, the national organization has turned a deaf ear to the interests and concerns of agriculture.

During the National 4-H Congress in Washington last month, a breakout session was held on animal care. That is not unusual, but the sponsoring organization certainly was. HSUS and American agriculture are locked in a pitched battle on the local, state, and national levels over the future of animal agriculture. So, to have them involved with an organization like 4-H, with deep roots in farming, does not smell right. At the end of the session, the 25 youth that participated in the workshop were provided with resource material that included HSUS propaganda. The 35-page HSUS Mission Humane Action Guide, which encourages youth to set up animal protection clubs and devotes pages to researching animal issues, “making your voice heard,” and raising funds. If you throw a party, the material suggests showing videos from the HSUS Web site and serving vegan refreshments. And just about every page plugs information available on the HSUS Web site. “You’ll also learn about lobbying, one of the most effective ways of making change for animals,” says the guide’s message from CEO Wayne Pacelle.

When word of this event began to leak out in the ag media, the reaction was quick and virulent. Instead of admitting they had made a seriously bad mistake, the National 4-H organization defended their association with HSUS, “The workshop was approved by the planning committee because the proposal aligned with the goals of the 4-H conference and did not present any indication of anti-animal agriculture views or positions.” Leaders on the state and local levels took strong exception with the position of the national office. OSU Extension Director Keith Smith issued a statement April 2 saying Ohio’s 4-H program was “very distressed that this happened at a national 4-H event,” and that the Ohio 4-H organization had expressed that dismay to the 4-H National Headquarters and USDA-NIFA, “The primary concern about this distribution is that HSUS is well known for its anti-animal agriculture views and positions, and 4-H has a long tradition of providing education in the animal sciences, which includes the dimension of positive animal welfare.” Individuals blasted the National 4-H Facebook fan page with even stronger statements. One poster called it an “irresponsible decision.”
Full story ...

Ohio Gov. names Livestock Care Standards Board

Tuesday, April 6, 2010 Farm and Dairy

COLUMBUS — Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland signed the legislation making the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board a reality March 31, and on April 6 he announced his 10 appointments to the board.

The governor’s appointments include: Tony Forshey, Leon Weaver, Jeff Wuebker, Bobby Moser, Jeffrey LeJeune, Harold Dates, Jerry Lahmers, Lisa Hamler-Fugitt, Robert Cole, and Stacey Atherton.

Forshey currently serves as the state veterinarian for the Ohio Department of Agriculture.

Weaver, of Montpelier, serves as the owner and operator of Bridgewater Dairy. He also serves as a member of the board of directors for the Ohio Livestock Coalition and the Ohio Dairy Industry Forum. He previously served as the president of the Ohio Dairy Industry Forum and as a professor at the University of California’s Veterinarian Medicine School. Weaver received a and a doctorate of veterinary medicine from the University of Pennsylvania in 1971.

Wuebker, of Versailles, has served as the co-owner of Wuebker Farms since 2001. He also serves as the president of the Ohio Soybean Association and is a member of the Ohio Corn Growers Association and the Ohio Cattleman’s Association.

He received a bachelor’s degree from the Ohio State University in 1993.

Moser is vice president for agricultural administration and the dean of the College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences at the Ohio State University since 1991.

LeJeune, of Wooster, is an associate professor for Food and Animal Health at the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center at the Ohio State University. He also serves as the chair of the Agriculture Animal Care and Use Committee at the Ohio State University. He received a bachelor’s degree from the Universite de Moncton and a doctorate of veterinary medicine from the University of Prince Edward Island. LeJeune also received a Ph.D. from Washington State University in 2000.

Dates, of Cincinnati, has served as the president and CEO of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of Cincinnati since 1986.

Jerry Lahmers, of Newcomerstown, currently owns and operates a family farm that includes a cow/calf feedlot and grain operations. He previously served as a veterinarian who treated and cared for animals in Tuscarawas County for 29 years.

Hamler-Fugitt, of Reynoldsburg, currently serves as the executive director of the Ohio Association of Second Harvest Foodbanks. She previously served as the public policy director and the statewide food and nutrition program coordinator for the Ohio Hunger Task Force.

Cole, of Gahanna, served in various roles for the USDA for over 33 years, including serving as the executive director of the USDA’s Franklin County Office and as acting state director in 2003. He retired from the U.S Department of Agriculture in 2003 and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. at the University of Dayton.

Atherton, of Newark, has served as the co-owner for Shipley Farms since 2009. She previously served as a manager for Shipley Farms from 2006-2009. She received a bachelor’s degree from the Ohio State University in 2006

In addition to the governor’s appointments, Ohio Department of Agriculture Director Robert Boggs serves on the 13-member board, as well a selection from both the House Speaker and Senate President.

Senate President Bill Harris has named Bill Moody, of Knox County, former deputy director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and family farmer.

4-H catching heat for HSUS presentation

It is appalling to learn that 4-H opened their doors to HSUS. How can 4-H leaders be unaware of the massive attack by HSUS on animal ownership?

April 5, 2010 by Ken Anderson Brownfield Ag News

The national 4-H organization is catching heat for allowing the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to make a presentation at the National 4-H Conference in late March.

The focus of the conference’s workshops was supposed to be civic engagement, community service and youth volunteerism. However, some of those who sat in on the HSUS presentation say the material was more focused on HSUS’ goals related to animal rights and animal welfare.

Many state 4-H organizations are scrambling to separate themselves from the controversy. For example, the Kansas 4-H Youth Development Program has issued a statement emphasizing it does not agree with the values supported by HSUS.

In a statement posted on its Facebook page, the national 4-H organization defended its decision, saying that HSUS’ proposal for a workshop presentation met the guidelines set for the conference. It says the HSUS workshop was approved by the planning committee, quote, “because the proposal aligned with the goals of the 4-H Conference and did not present any indication of anti-animal agriculture views or positions.”

Animal care standards bill advances in Kentucky

March 29, 2010 by Ken Anderson, Brownfield Ag News

A bill to create a Livestock Care Standards Commission in Kentucky has been passed by the Kentucky House and could soon be headed to the governor for his signature.

The legislation—which is backed by Kentucky Farm Bureau—is designed to limit groups such as the Humane Society of the United States from trying to get tougher livestock care rules implemented in the state. If approved, the new commission could recommend on-farm animal care regulations to an existing state agriculture board, which could adopt them.

Eating Less Meat Won't Curb Climate Change, Air Quality Expert Says

Monday, March 22, 2010 (American Meat Institute)

Consuming less meat will not reduce our greenhouse gas production, a leading air quality expert said on Monday, Agence France-Presse reports. Frank Mitloehner, a professor at the University of California-Davis, delivered his remarks during a conference of the American Chemical Society in California.

Mitloehner is the author of the published study, “Cleaning the Air: Livestock’s Contribution to Climate Change,” which asserts that despite often repeated claims, it is simply not scientifically accurate to blame livestock for climate change. The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Advances in Agronomy.

Mitloehner traces much of the public confusion over meat and milk’s role in climate change to a 2006 United Nations report, titled "Livestock's Long Shadow," which he says overstates the role livestock play in greenhouse gas emissions.

These statements are not accurate, yet their wide distribution through news media have put us on the wrong path toward solutions, Mitloehner said.

"We certainly can reduce our greenhouse-gas production, but not by consuming less meat and milk… but by increasing efficient meat production in developing countries, where growing populations need more nutritious food,” Mitloehner says.

To view the abstract of Mitloehner’s report, click here

States Considering Livestock Care Standards Board

Idaho and Missouri are taking preemptive action to protect livestock production.
Compiled by staff at Farm Futures
Published: Mar 16, 2010

The Idaho Senate has approved a bill that would set up a Livestock Care Standards Board. The board would be similar to the one voted in last November in Ohio. Like Ohio, Idaho hopes to get ahead of any efforts by the Humane Society of the United States to influence animal welfare laws in the state.

The legislation has yet to pass the Idaho House. If it goes into law it would create a 13-member committee that would include representatives from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, statewide organizations for dairy, livestock and cattle professionals and legislators and would make recommendations on animal care.

In Missouri, a bill is moving through the Missouri General Assembly that would protect livestock care practices in that state. The Missourians for Animal Care Coalition supports the bill, because it would protect the right to raise animals in Missouri. The Coalition says there are animal rights extremist groups like the Humane Society of the United States trying to get a ballot initiative that would put severe limitations on the ability of anyone to own and raise animals.

The intent of the bill, according to Missouri Farm Bureau's legislative director Leslie Holloway, is to try to ensure that additional restrictions on raising animals, whether it be livestock or dogs or whatever the case may be, are under the jurisdiction of the General Assembly rather than interests that might come in from out of state such as the Humane Society of the United States.

If passed, the animal care constitutional amendment would join a HSUS-backed bill on this fall's state-wide ballot that would crack down on dog breeders in the state.