Brief filed in Colorado elephant rights case |
Dear John,
Our lawsuit on behalf of five elephants imprisoned in the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs, Colorado has reached an important juncture: all the briefs are in, and we’re now waiting for the state’s highest court to set a date for oral argument.
The Colorado Supreme Court will be the second US state high court to rule on an appeal involving a nonhuman animal’s right to liberty. The New York Court of Appeals, ruling on Happy’s case, was the first (look out soon for an update from my colleague Courtney on Happy and our continued legislative advocacy in New York). |
Filed yesterday, our latest brief responds to the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo’s legal arguments, which attempt to justify the dismissal of the elephants’ case. Read our brief to see how we break down their erroneous and, at times, patently ludicrous claims. As in our opening brief, we argue that Missy, Kimba, Lucky, LouLou, and Jambo must not be denied the opportunity to challenge their unjust and abjectly cruel confinement through the time-honored writ of habeas corpus simply because they’re not human.
We also argue that because our habeas corpus petition makes a prima facie case that the elephants are entitled to the right to liberty and release to a sanctuary–in other words, that we’ve presented sufficient evidence for the litigation to be allowed to proceed–the Supreme Court must reverse the trial court’s decision and require it to hold a hearing on the lawfulness of the elephants’ imprisonment.
The Cheyenne Mountain Zoo has attempted to mislead the public and judges into thinking that this case is a matter for the legislature and not the courts, that recognizing the right to liberty of five elephants will upend our legal system, and that these elephants are better off in their current prison than in an accredited elephant sanctuary. But their self-serving arguments don’t hold any water. As we write in our brief: |
