US judge asked to rule on orca 'slaves'

7 Feb 2012, 12:03 pm   -   Source: AP
7 Comments
Share This
+ Comment
7
PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves, forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego, California and Orlando, Florida. (Getty)

PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves, forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego, California and Orlando, Florida. (Getty)

A federal judge for the first time in US history has heard arguments in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.

A federal judge for the first time in US history has heard arguments in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.

US 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 (PETA) that names five orcas as plaintiffs in the case.

PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves, forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego, California and Orlando, Florida.

"This case is on the next frontier of civil rights," said PETA lawyer Jeffrey Kerr, representing the five orcas.

Sea World's lawyer, 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 American constitution's 13th amendment, which 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."

Judge 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 questioned how far the implications of a favourable 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 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 defence said. If the court were to grant orcas constitutional rights, Shaw warned the ruling would have profound implications not just for zoos and aquariums but also for such things as the US government's use of dogs to sniff out bombs and drugs.

"We're talking about hell unleashed," he said.

PETA said a ruling in its favour would only help to protect orcas in the entertainment industry. 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.

Brushing animals off as property is the same argument that was used against African-Americans and women before their constitutional rights were protected, PETA says.  

Shaw counters that both women and African-Americans are human beings, and the constitution was written to protect prople.

The judge did not specify when he would issue his ruling.

  • Follow us: 
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Follow us on Youtube

Your Comments

Animals for private entertainment

T - from Sydney, 3 months ago

Animals for private entertainment business is unethical just like those bear/monkey shows.

@Trist

Kev - from Noraville, 3 months ago

While I see your point Trist many animals in captivity were raised in captivity, otherwise they can be extremely hard to tame. I'm personally against the use of animals as entertainment but like others I have concerns about what this kind of mind set can lead, captive animals today in Australia, the US and most of Europe are treated exceptionally well and provide an invaluable service to the public to educate them on their conservation and status in the world. Captive animals allow people to see and care about them and thus care a bit more about the environments we are destroying. I hope that one day we will value the environment over the dollar but at the current rate of environmental destruction many species last frontier will be in zoos where effective breeding programs can be established to keep disappearing species alive. The Tasmanian devil for example will be extinct by facial cancer soon if not for the breeding programs established in zoos. Zoos are an invaluable resource for the long term future of many animals.

This is a bigger issue

MusouB - from Earth, 3 months ago

While I agree with those here who have called for release, I feel there is a much bigger picture to be considered. As the article suggests, this decision could have far-reaching implications, potentially leading to the required release of other captive animals. The sad truth is that many of these animals do not have a safe/functioning habitat to return to, as they have been destroyed by human interference. I am all for animal rights, but we must address these larger environmental issues also.

@ Kev

Trist - from Knox, 3 months ago

I don't think captive animals should be release back into the wild for the same reasons you've mentioned. I do however think that they should stop being captured in the first place and used as entertainment. These are WILD animals. Why can't we just let them be?! And if we do want to get up and close go swim with them ( and swim in their playground ) we wouldn't last very long.

Remember Willy?

Kev - from Noraville, 3 months ago

Anyone remember the release of free willy, in real life he couldn't adapt to the wild and died. Releasing captive animals is not a good idea as many can't adjust to life in the wild. As long as animals are treated well, provided with medical care and have access to entertaining stimuli it is humane. Captive animals live considerably longer then wild animals for a reason, nature is harsh, cruel and indifferent to suffering. The days of the old "entertainment" zoos is pretty much gone in much of the world, captive animals allow the average person to learn and observe these incredible creatures, not to mention the invaluable education they provide in zoological studies and conservation programs.

Do It, give them civil rights.

Mona - from Australia, 3 months ago

Americans basically give Big Business the right to Vote anyway by allowing them to donate, lobby ( read attempt to bribe ) political parties and politicans and so it seems rather fitting to adopt similar rights to other Animals. Australia should follow suit , we allow the same. The Abbott party willingly and graciously accepted a donation of $250, 000 from the tobacco industry.

Harmony

Bear - from Earth, 3 months ago

All animals should be released from captivity.

Join the Discussion

Name
City / Suburb E.g. Artarmon, Sydney
Title
Comment
You have characters remaining.
Validation
What's this?
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.
All submitted comments become the property of SBS. They are moderated, so we reserve the right to edit comments and remove HTML tags. Not all submitted comments will be published. Publication does not mean we endorse the opinions expressed. Please read our terms and conditions for more information.