No Habeas Corpus for Tommy the Chimp, for Now

By Ikiwaner (Own work) [GFDL 1.2 (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/fdl-1.2.html)], via Wikimedia CommonsAn organization called the Nonhuman Rights Project (NHRP) filed several lawsuits in New York state courts last month asserting habeas corpus claims on behalf of several chimpanzees. The lawsuits basically asked the courts to grant limited human rights to four chimpanzees living in human captivity in the state. This is believed to be the first time a lawsuit has sought habeas protection for nonhumans.

According to the NHRP, one of the chimps, Tommy, is living in a cage on a used trailer lot. The owner of the trailer lot, Patrick Lavery, takes issue with that description, telling the Daily Beast that he has tried but has been unable to find a sanctuary for Tommy, and adding,

I’m not just some Joe Blow who’s got a chimp locked up in the garage. Of course, I think they should live in the wild, but the sad fact is that not all of them do and that’s where people like me come in, spending $100,000 of my own money to help out and buying monkey chow by the ton.

Another chimp, Kiko, is deaf and lives in a private home in Niagara Falls, according to the NHRP. The other two chimps, Hercules and Leo, are at a research center at Long Island’s Stony Brook University.

By By Aaron Logan [CC-BY-2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5)], via Wikimedia CommonsThrough New York’s online court system, I identified three lawsuits filed in December 2013:

A judge dismissed Tommy’s case after an hour-long hearing on December 3, expressing sympathy for the cause but declining to extend legal personhood to a chimpanzee. In Kiko’s case, a judge denied the request for a order to show cause after a hearing by telephone on December 9, saying that the question of chimpanzee personhood is better resolved by the legislature than the courts. A Suffolk County judge denied the petition for Hercules and Leo without holding a hearing. The NHRP has announced that it will be appealing all three cases. Continue reading

Share

Texas Court Clarifies How to Appeal a “Dangerous Dog” Ruling

The law governing “dangerous dogs” is not as well-defined as it should be, with jurisdiction often split between municipal and county courts. Procedures may vary widely from one municipality or county to another, including between a municipality and the county in which it is located. In an attempt to be brief, if a dog bites or otherwise attacks someone, the local animal control authority may take possession of the dog, and a judge must make a determination as to whether the dog meets certain criteria to be declared “dangerous” (a statutorily-defined term.) The law mandates various requirements on the owner of a “dangerous” dog, including maintaining extra insurance and keeping the dog in an approved enclosure. If the court finds that the dog caused the death of, or serious bodily injury to, a person, it can order the dog destroyed.

Chapter 822 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, which covers regulation of non-livestock domestic animals (e.g. dogs, cats, etc.) does not provide specifics about appealing a municipal or county court’s determination that a dog is “dangerous”

In Romano v. Texas, a woman fostering a dog for a rescue group was bitten (the court says “attacked,” but I’m assuming one or more bites were involved) by the dog, an a Montgomery County justice of the peace ruled that the dog caused “serious bodily injury” and was to be destroyed pursuant to § 822.003(e) of the Health and Safety Code. The rescue group appealed to the county court, which dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, albeit without any findings of fact or conclusions of law. The group then appealed that dismissal to the 9th District Court of Appeals. Continue reading

Share

The Wrong Side of History

I sincerely hope that history will mock these people:

The Harris County GOP sued the City of Houston on Tuesday, challenging Mayor Annise Parker’s decision to extend health and life insurance benefits to legally married same-sex couples whose marriages have been recognized in states with marriage equality laws.

The new policy has been put on hold by District Judge Lisa Millard after signing a temporary restraining order. The policy won’t go before a judge until after New Year’s Day, on Jan. 6, 2014.

Jared Woodfill, the chairman of the Harris County GOP, is leading the lawsuit. “This is one of the most egregious acts by an elected official I’ve ever seen,” said Woodfill. “They just decided to, unilaterally, as a lame duck, thumb their nose at the will of the people and just spit on the U.S. Constitution.”

Where exactly in the U.S. Constitution does it say gay marriage is illegal remains to be mystery.

Share

That’s Demon Prince, Esquire to You!

By Sabbut from es [GFDL, CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia CommonsThis guy sounds pretty cool to me:

Clark Allen Peterson is more than just a devoted fan of tabletop role-playing fantasy games.

He has been an entrepreneur and publisher who mentors game designers, heralds product releases from a company he founded, judges design competitions and posts online comments about the intricacies of this make-believe world of monsters, mythical creatures, magic and good vs. evil.

Many know him as the demon prince Orcus, Lord of the Undead.

Others know him as the Honorable Clark A. Peterson, a state magistrate judge in Coeur d’Alene.

Apparently not everyone thinks a judge should be gallivanting about mystical realms doing, uh, whatever it is people do in role-playing games (I’m supposed to know this stuff, but I really don’t.) I mean, as long as he doesn’t start ordering people to go on quests instead of performing community service, what’s the problem?

While the past two years have been tumultuous in his personal life – a divorce, bankruptcy filings and thousands of dollars in overdue income taxes – Peterson has remained caught up in the world of role-playing games.

Okay, all of those things can be distracting, but we all need some source of joy in our lives, right?

Parties in two civil cases that went before Peterson believe that his hobby, coupled with his financial and marital problems, distracted the judge from his duties, drew out their cases and cost them far more in legal bills than necessary. They also contend that the amount of time the judge spends on message boards and the content of some of his posts – from playful digressions to sexually suggestive banter – fall short of the high standards of conduct expected of judges.

So the issues are that cases take a long time to resolve, and that the judge communicates a certain way outside of court? I can’t say for certain, obviously, but the role-playing game stuff sounds like it might be more of a distraction for dissatisfied litigants than for the judge himself. But I could be wrong. Anyway, the whole article is worth a read.

Photo credit: By Sabbut from es [GFDL, CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

Acing the Citizenship Test

Albert Einstein citizenship NYWTS

Pictured: Not a natural-born U.S. citizen.

The concept of “citizenship” is pretty silly if you think about it. Acquiring United States citizenship is generally based on one of four factors:

  1. The birth canal through which you begin life happens to be located on sovereign United States territory at the moment of your birth;
  2. Said birth canal belongs to a U.S. citizen, regardless of where it is located at the moment of your birth;
  3. The sperm that successfully fertilized the egg that eventually became you came from a United States citizen, regardless of where any of the reproductive organs involved are located at the moment of your birth; or
  4. You complete a metric fuck-ton of paperwork, are not a “terrorist” based on the vague definition du jour, and pass a citizenship test.

The people who seem to be the most protective (defensive?) of their status as U.S. citizens tend to belong to the first group. Really, though, the privileges and immunities of United States citizenship accrued to them entirely by chance, not through any particular accomplishment or merit.

People in the fourth group, however, have to work for it, yet they don’t seem to get all that much respect for their efforts. It’s difficult to argue that one person who fits in the first group should be a U.S. citizen by virtue of birth, and another shouldn’t, but that is exactly what some people want to do in the cause of preventing so-called “anchor babies.” All this would accomplish, in reality, would be creating a secondary class of people born here but not really of here, because of the identity of their parents. That probably only seems like a fair arrangement if you genuinely believe that the location or identity of the birth canal through which you emerged somehow affects your identity as a person.

There is a point to all of this, I assure you. Read on… Continue reading

Share

Taking the Fight Where It Belongs on Reproductive Rights and Ideologically-Based Medical Decisions (UPDATED)

Four freedoms human rightsThe problem many women have with access to accurate, professional reproductive health care is not because of the doctors, other hospital staff, or even annoying protesters, but rather the administrators and ideologues that employ the medical professionals. It is therefore refreshing to see some pushback on that front.

The ACLU is suing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops over its hospital directives that allegedly led a Michigan hospital to give inaccurate medical information to a woman in order to avoid discussing abortion with her. The woman, according to the ACLU, was only in the 18th week of pregnancy when her water broke. The hospital kept sending her home, even though she was in terrible pain, the pregnancy had almost no chance of surviving, and the delay in treating her put her at ever-greater risk. Note that the lawsuit is not against the hospital or the doctors who allegedly denied her adequate care, but rather the religious organization that pulls the hospital’s strings.

You can have whatever religious beliefs you want, but you cannot force those beliefs onto others, especially when their life is at risk. Seriously, what is so hard to understand about that???

Several organizations have filed a complaint against the government of El Salvador with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission, claiming that the government’s refusal to allow a woman to undergo a life-saving abortion violated her human rights. The woman, identified as Beatriz, was 26 weeks pregnant with a “nonviable, anencephalic fetus.” Her prior health problems made it unlikely that she could survive the pregnancy, according to her doctors, but the Supreme Court of El Salvador denied her request for an emergency abortion in May 2013.

In June, the court reportedly allowed her doctors to perform an “emergency cesarian” that was pretty much a glorified hysterectomy. It saved her life, but the 22 year-old woman obviously will not be having any more children. All of this was apparently in the cause of maintaining the country’s absolute ban on abortion because of reasons.

Feminist organizations assert that Beatriz’s story reflects the consequences of the absolute criminalization of abortion and the institutional violence that is exercised against Salvadoran girls, adolescents, and adult women. According to data gathered by the Citizen Group for the Decriminalization of Abortion, between 2000 and 2011, a total of 129 women in El Salvador have been charged with abortion or aggravated homicide, with sentences ranging between two and 40 years in prison. Currently there are at least 30 women serving prison such sentences, the majority having suffered the loss of their pregnancies for various obstetric complications.

I don’t get it.

UPDATE (12/10/2013): Astute reader Kathleen directed my attention to a 1987 court case, In re A.C., 573 A.2d 1235 (D.C. Cir. 1990), in which the USCCB was one of only two organizations (along with Americans United for Life) to defend a hospital’s decision to perform a C-section on a terminally-ill cancer patient without her consent. The fetus survived about two hours after the procedure, and the mother survived a few more days. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the lower court ruling that allowed the procedure, finding that the woman had the right to make decisions regarding her own and the fetus’ health care. A report from the ACLU written ten years after oral arguments in the case recounted:

When an attorney for the hospital argued that it was appropriate to sacrifice a dying woman for her fetus, one judge replied incredulously, “Are you urging this court to find that you can handcuff a woman to a bed and force her to give birth?” Instead, the court resoundingly concluded that in virtually all circumstances a woman — not doctors or a judge — should make medical decisions on behalf of herself and her fetus. The opinion emphasized an argument made in the American Public Health Association’s friend-of-the court brief, that court-ordered intervention “drives women at high risk of complications during pregnancy and childbirth out of the health care system to avoid coerced treatment.”

Photo credit: By dbking (Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms”) [CC-BY-SA-2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

How Not to Get Arrested

A former police officer and prosecutor, Dale Carson, has written a book offering his pointers on how to avoid police trouble. It’s both scary and depressing. Via Mike Riggs at Business Insider:

“Law enforcement officers now are part of the revenue-gathering system,” Carson tells me in a phone interview. “The ranks of cops are young and competitive, they’re in competition with one another and intra-departmentally. It becomes a game. Policing isn’t about keeping streets safe, it’s about statistical success. The question for them is, ‘Who can put the most people in jail?'”

His book includes tips on how to “be invisible to police,” and seemingly reasonable things one should never do when a cop is talking to you. The theme, at least as presented in Riggs’ article, is the importance of compliance over any issues of personal pride. Being questioned by police is likely to be humiliating, Carson says, but getting arrested is worse, so suck it up.

The other day, Clark at Popehat wrote about a police chief who thinks cops should be prepared to tackle nearly any suspect:

[U]nless the citizen is “bracing for submission” and maintaining eye contact, the cop should consider “tackling” him.

On light of that, being invisible seems like the better course of action, but I’m still looking around for someone with an idea of how to actually improve things.

Share

If You Push Hard Enough, Maybe They’ll Finally Send the Black Helicopters

By Dmitry Pichugin [GFDL 1.2 (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/fdl-1.2.html) or GFDL 1.2 (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/fdl-1.2.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

What is this, Russia? In this picture, yes.

I came across an old complaint about the Affordable Care Act during my Googlings, which criticized a law professor’s attempts to alleviate concerns about the penalty aspect of the individual mandate. Walter Dellinger told the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 2011, according to Ann Althouse:

There’s a misimpression out there that… federal agents arrive in black helicopters dressed in fully equipped armed ninja costumes, kick down your bedroom door and drag you off at the point of bayonets to an insurance agency.

In fact, what — all that happens is that for those who are not otherwise exempted and — when they’re filling out their federal income tax return, if you’re not maintaining minimum coverage, you have to pay an additional 2.5 percent, much less than Social Security. That’s all that happened.

So in that sense, this great intrusion on liberty doesn’t approach any slippery slopes or exceed any understood limits in our legal culture.

The concern seems to be that the government will exercise its police power against people who refuse to cooperate with the insurance mandate, pay the fine, or respond in any way to what the law says. Believe me, I am very sympathetic to the argument that we must be vigilant against expansions of the government’s police power, but this is not one of those instances of government going too far. Besides that, I’ll be more sympathetic to concerns from the right over police overreach when they get more consistent about it. Continue reading

Share

A Hobbit by Any Other Name Would Smell Less Infringing

The Asylum is an interesting film production company. On the one hand, I give them props for sheer brazenness. In addition to sharing Sharknado with the world, this is the company that produces direct-to-cable or -DVD films that often bear remarkable resemblances to, and with release dates in close proximity to, major Hollywood films. When I Am Legend came out in 2007, The Asylum released I Am Omega (or I Am Ωmega). (That’s even funnier if you know the Will Smith movie’s predecessor.) Its counterpart to Roland Emmerich’s 2008 film 10,000 BC was entitled 100 Million BC, and apparently had dinosaurs. The Keanu Reeves-led remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still was joined, so to speak, by The Day the Earth Stopped. Right before the Brendan Fraser film Journey to the Center of the Earth came out in theaters, The Asylum released a film starring Greg Evigan (the other one of My Two Dads) entitled…..Journey to the Center of the Earth. I guess there’s plenty of Jules Verne to go around. The list goes on and on.

For the most part, The Asylum seems to have avoided serious legal entanglements with regard to their films’ occasional similarity to movies that get actual theatrical releases. Sony, which distributed the 2011 film Battle: Los Angeles in the rental market, took legal action against the directors of 2010’s Skyline because of similarities between the two films. The Asylum’s Battle of Los Angeles [emphasis added], released just before Battle: Los Angeles, did not have the same legal issues.

You might think that The Asylum would have some major copyright problems, with a movie like The Terminators coming out close to the same time as Terminator Salvation. You can’t copyright an idea, though. This is how movies like Armageddon and Deep Impact can coexist. Continue reading

Share