this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
35 points (100.0% liked)

Weird News - Things that make you go 'hmmm'

1025 readers
126 users here now

Rules:

  1. News must be from a reliable source. No tabloids or sensationalism, please.

  2. Try to keep it safe for work. Contact a moderator before posting if you have any doubts.

  3. Titles of articles must remain unchanged; however extraneous information like "Watch:" or "Look:" can be removed. Titles with trailing, non-relevant information can also be edited so long as the headline's intent remains intact.

  4. Be nice. If you've got nothing positive to say, don't say it.

Violators will be banned at mod's discretion.

Communities We Like:

-Not the Onion

-And finally...

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Court says elephants not human, cannot seek freedom
    
  • Animal rights group says decision perpetuates an injustice

  • Zoo called lawsuit frivolous, cites earlier rulings

Jan 22 (Reuters) - Five elderly African elephants at a Colorado zoo will stay there, after the state's highest court said the animals have no legal right to demand their release because they are not human.

Tuesday's 6-0 decision by Colorado's Supreme Court means Jambo, Kimba, LouLou, Lucky and Missy will remain at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs.

It followed a similar decision in 2022 by New York state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, that another aged elephant, Happy, had to remain at New York City's Bronx Zoo.

An animal rights non-profit, Nonhuman Rights Project, brought both cases on the elephants' behalf under a legal doctrine known as "habeas corpus," saying the animals should live in sanctuaries.

Citing affidavits from seven animal biologists, the group told the Colorado court that elephants are highly social and mobile, share many cognitive abilities with humans including empathy and self-awareness, and when confined in zoos can experience boredom and stress that could lead to brain damage.

But the court said Colorado's habeas statute applies to persons, not to nonhuman animals "no matter how cognitively, psychologically, or socially sophisticated" they might be.

It also said Nonhuman Rights Project's concession during oral argument that it was seeking only different confinement, not complete freedom, for the elephants was another reason to treat them and humans differently.

The case "does not turn on our regard for these majestic animals generally or these five elephants specifically," Justice Maria Berkenkotter wrote. "Because an elephant is not a person, the elephants here do not have standing to bring a habeas corpus claim."

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here