United States v. Stevens [08-769]: an Historic Event for the Animal Community

United States v. Stevens is the first Supreme Court case challenging the constitutionality of an animal cruelty statute. This is an historic event for the animal community, and we are proud to have representatives from K9 PAC there this morning to show our support.

The Depiction of Animal Cruelty Law

The law under review is the federal Depiction of Animal Cruelty Law that was passed by Congress with overwhelming support in 1999 in response to interstate sale of videos depicting illegal acts of animal cruelty, including "animal crush" videos. The federal law has an exemption for materials with "serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value."¹ Nonetheless, it is under review on the basis of constitutionality.

Robert Stevens (Respondent)

Robert Stevens is a known promoter of dog fighting, has peddled several videos depicting grossly inhumane treatment of animals, and authored a dog fighting training manual, "Dogs of Velvet and Steel: Pit Bulldogs a Manual for Owners". Upon review of Stevens' case, the Pennsylvania federal district court found that Robert Stevens did not meet any of the exemptions stated in the previous section, and he was convicted under 18 U.S.C. Section 48 for "knowingly selling depictions of animal cruelty with the intention of placing those depictions in interstate commerce for commercial gain." ¹ Stevens appealed his conviction arguing that 18 U.S.C. Section 48, on its face, was unconstitutional because it violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit agreed with Mr. Stevens and reversed his conviction, holding unconstitutional 18 U.S.C. Section 48. The court reasoned that the dog fighting videos he sold were protected speech and that 18 U.S.C. Section 48 did not serve a compelling governmental interest.²

Implications for the Animal Community & "Animal Crush" Videos

The "animal crush" videos that largely influenced the introduction and passing of the Depiction of Animal Cruelty Law, show women in stiletto heels crush, impale, and burn small animals to appease the sexual fetishes of their sick and depraved viewers. In the decade that the Depiction of Animal Cruelty Law has been in force, the crush video industry plummeted.
However, following the ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, animal crush videos resurfaced under the protection of the First Amendment and sales have increased dramatically. ¹

Now, on the day of the Supreme Court hearing, the animal community waits anxiously to see if a decade of animal protection will be restored, or if the injury, torture, and death of innocent animals for profit and entertainment will be shielded by the First Amendment. A ruling upholding the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit could be devastating to the animal community and to the animals that play leading roles in dog fighting and animal crush videos. Further, we will look to the written opinions, both concurring and dissenting, for direction in future animal welfare and animal rights cases.

The Supreme Court Hearing

This morning, October 6, 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States is scheduled to answer the question, "Is 18 U.S.C. Section 48, on its face, unconstitutional under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment?"²

K9 PAC Position Statement

We at K9 PAC stand with HSUS and other animal welfare organizations in opposition of Stevens and in support of upholding the Depiction of Animal Cruelty Law. The torture and killing of animals for amusement and profit is not an issue of free speech, rather, it is an issue of animal protection and basic human decency. The First Amendment, in its genesis, was never intended to protect perverted and criminal enterprises. We hope that the Supreme Court will stand firmly on the side of animal welfare and help to reinforce that we are a society that takes our freedoms seriously and refuses to allow criminals to twist our Bill of Rights to shield themselves from just and due legal consequences.

Sources:

1. Wayne Pacelle: A Humane Nation, "Animal Torture is Not Free Speech". October 5, 2009 (http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2009/10/stevens-supreme-court.html)
   
2. Oyez Supreme Court Media (http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2009/2009_08_769)

Shelters vs. Breeders – Divisive Tactics Threaten the Animal Community

With animal shelter populations on the rise and corresponding euthanasia rates at outrageously high levels, the animal community has reacted with a strong sense of urgency to promote animal adoptions over the purchasing of animals from pet stores and breeders. While most have done this in a responsible manner by educating the public about shelter dogs, working to find the right match between dog and family, and creating a sense of pride in having an "American Shelter Dog", I have been disappointed to see a few organizations take the more aggressive and less effective approach of condemning all breeders and the dog parents who purchase from them. These few, yet influential, organizations have managed to place responsible and caring dog breeders (and the people who buy from them) in the same category as inhumane breeders and puppy mills. This assertion is irresponsible, inaccurate, and entirely ineffective.

While I completely support and encourage the adoption of dogs and other animals from shelters, and have vowed that my family's next dog (and likely every dog thereafter) will be a rescue dog, I also fully support responsible dog breeders and the caring pet parents who buy from them. Responsible dog breeders play an important role in maintaining the lineage of pure bred dogs. Many of them are extremely knowledgeable about the history of the dogs, their specific medical and social needs, and their personalities. Often times, these breeders play an instrumental role in educating dog trainers, other dog professionals, and the public about what the breed needs, how it behaves, and what living situation it best adapts to. Understanding a breed can be an important part of relating to a dog and finding the appropriate family, lifestyle, and training to fit them, in order to maintain a happy, healthy, and well-balanced dog (a la Cesar Millan).

Responsible dog breeders should be welcomed members of the animal community. Lumping them in with puppy mills and other breeders who keep their animals in unsanitary, confined, and otherwise inhumane conditions is not only inappropriate, it is also poor strategy that serves to ostracize the majority of the dog advocate community. According to the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) 2007-2008 National Pet Owners Survey, only 10% of owned dogs in America are adopted from shelters. While this is a terrific argument for increasing dog adoptions from shelters, it is also a reminder that 90% of dogs with homes belong to parents who bought them from a breeder. Thus, any strategy that is based on condemning all breeders and those pet parents who buy from them is at the very least unsound, and at most, a strategy to lose the parents of 90% of America's owned dogs as allies in the fight for animal welfare.

I have been truly inspired in recent years by the remarkable collaboration of shelters, sanctuaries, organizations, individuals, and adoptive families to aid in the rescue of dogs and other animals from the atrocities of animal cruelty and neglect. Multi-state busts of dog fighting rings and puppy mill operations, and the publicity they have gained, is impressive and a sign that this is a pivotal time in the fight for animal welfare. Although it is just the beginning, we have been able to make an unprecedented impact in the lives of animals, and we must stand unified in this effort. As a community, we must remain focused on our goals rather than distract ourselves with divisive tactics that fail to target the real issues. We must remember that the animal welfare and animal rights movements are founded on one basic principal – the love and protection of animals. Regardless of whether the animal in your life was purchased from a breeder or adopted from a shelter, it is the love and responsibility for that animal that is the foundation of our community and should be supported without question, disparity, or judgment. These are the values upon which K9 PAC was founded; we welcome all dog and animal advocates and strive to unite our community into one, significant, and unwavering voice that will be a powerful influence in the political system.