[link removed] [[link removed]]
[link removed] [[link removed]]
Petition filed in Colorado elephant rights case
Zoos have a vested interest in elephants remaining legal things with no rights, and they have vastly more resources than we do. If you can, please donate today to help strengthen and grow the fight for elephant rights. [[link removed]]
Hi John –this is Elizabeth Stein, the NhRP’s Litigation Director.
On January 21st, we shared the news that Colorado’s highest court issued an opinion in our case on behalf of five elephants held captive in the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo–stating that unless an individual is human, they have no right to liberty, “no matter how cognitively, psychologically, or socially sophisticated they may be.”
On Tuesday we filed a petition for rehearing in this case, urging the Court to reconsider its opinion. Let me explain why.
First, what the Colorado Supreme Court has done here is unprecedented–and not in a good way.
In 2023, the NhRP filed a habeas corpus petition under Colorado common law on behalf of elephants Jambo, Kimba, LouLou, Lucky, and Missy and sought the recognition of their right to liberty and release to an elephant sanctuary. The writ of habeas corpus, known as “the Great Writ,” is a centuries-old means of challenging unjust confinement. It’s a critical judicial safeguard of civil liberties that has historically been used in novel cases, such as ours, where the confined individual had no right to liberty.
In rendering its decision, the Colorado Supreme Court should have correctly concluded that the question of whether the elephants have the right to liberty is a matter for the judiciary, to be determined based on science and common law principles of justice, such as liberty and equality. But that’s not what the Court did–and this is a real problem.
Essentially, the Colorado Supreme Court passed the buck to the legislature on the matter of our clients’ legal personhood, wrongly stating the legislature had already precluded nonhuman animals from being recognized as legal persons with rights. By doing so, the Court ruled that the Great Writ, as it existed and was cherished for centuries, no longer exists in Colorado. And if that wasn’t bad enough, the Court also ignored its own prior decisions in concluding that habeas corpus was unavailable because the NhRP was seeking the elephants’ release to a sanctuary and not their total freedom (which is no longer possible given their decades in captivity).
In short, the Colorado Supreme Court chose to turn habeas corpus on its head–including for humans who seek relief from unlawful confinement–rather than allow any further judicial consideration of the elephants’ suffering, their autonomy, and their right to liberty. It also turned a blind eye to its judicial obligations to steward the common law.
DONATE → [[link removed]]
Second, the NhRP advocates zealously on behalf of our clients. Colorado law allows us to file this rehearing petition. Such petitions are rarely granted, but–no differently than if our clients were human–the NhRP will diligently pursue the best legal strategy on their behalf. Jambo, Kimba, LouLou, Lucky, and Missy are suffering because they’ve been denied their freedom. They’ve done nothing wrong except to be born elephants. Like anyone enduring an injustice, they deserve to have their case taken as far as it could possibly go. The Colorado Supreme Court needs to get the law right here and correct the damage this decision has done.
The bigger picture as I see it: You might be wondering why the Colorado Supreme Court went this far–why it would abdicate its own common law power and totally disrupt settled habeas corpus law, just to forever prevent a nonhuman animal from seeking justice.
One way to think about it is this: there’s no sound legal, moral, or ethical reason for concluding that our clients can’t have the right to liberty. This lack of sound legal, moral, or ethical reasoning opens the door to judicial contradiction and irrationality. Our job is to point out the contradiction and irrationality, again and again, and shift the conversation to the realm of justice, principle, and reason.
The good news is that judicial support is steadily emerging. For example, in Happy the elephant’s case, two dissenting opinions by judges on New York’s highest court, including the now-Chief Judge, were in favor of recognizing the availability of habeas corpus to certain nonhuman animals. The Colorado Supreme Court had an opportunity to learn from this valuable lesson of judicial courage, rather than ignore the opinions. But this too will come with time.
We expect a decision in the coming weeks and will keep you posted. Again, I want to thank you on behalf of everyone at the NhRP for supporting this case and this fight. You’re the reason we can persist in our mission. You’re the reason we can be bold, fearless, and strategic in demanding the legal rights nonhuman animals are legally entitled to.
Thank you,
Elizabeth Stein
Litigation Director, the NhRP
[link removed] [[link removed]]
The NhRP is a nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) corporation (Tax ID #: 04-3289466). It is solely through your donations that we can continue to work for the recognition and protection of fundamental rights for nonhuman animals.
FOLLOW
[link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]]
DONATE [[link removed]]
GET YOUR NhRP GEAR AT OUR ONLINE SHOP [[link removed]]
The Nonhuman Rights Project
611 Pennsylvania Avenue SE
#345
Washington, DC 20003
United States
[email protected] [[email protected]]
Click here to unsubscribe. [[link removed]]