From inside the cage to outside the box: Natural resources as a platform for nonhuman animal personhood in the U.S. and Australia

Randall S Abate, Jonathan Crowe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Nonhuman animals are currently treated as property under U.S. and Australian law, leaving them open to various kinds of exploitation. There has been a gradual evolution away from this property paradigm in both countries, but significant work remains to ensure that nonhuman animals are afforded adequate legal protections. This article considers the legal avenues available to protect nonhuman animals in the U.S. and Australia, focusing particularly on the attribution of legal personhood. Section 2 of the article reviews attempts by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) to establish legal personhood protections for nonhuman animals through writ of habeas corpus petitions under U.S. common law. Section 3 surveys the options for recognition of animal personhood under Australian law, discussing issues of standing, habeas corpus, and guardianship models. Section 4 discusses the growing movement to assign legal personhood rights to natural resources. The article proposes that to the extent that natural resources have received legal personhood protection to recognize their inherent value, similar protections should be afforded to animals. In the meantime, habeas corpus, standing, and guardianship theories provide valuable procedural platforms for incremental progress toward protecting nonhuman animals in both the U.S. and Australia.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)54-78
Number of pages25
JournalGlobal Journal of Animal Law
Volume5
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 5 Sep 2017

Fingerprint

natural resources
animal
legal protection
guardianship
Law
petition
common law
attribution
exploitation
paradigm

Cite this

@article{8d842ca2740e4dbe8513168cbe29971f,
title = "From inside the cage to outside the box: Natural resources as a platform for nonhuman animal personhood in the U.S. and Australia",
abstract = "Nonhuman animals are currently treated as property under U.S. and Australian law, leaving them open to various kinds of exploitation. There has been a gradual evolution away from this property paradigm in both countries, but significant work remains to ensure that nonhuman animals are afforded adequate legal protections. This article considers the legal avenues available to protect nonhuman animals in the U.S. and Australia, focusing particularly on the attribution of legal personhood. Section 2 of the article reviews attempts by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) to establish legal personhood protections for nonhuman animals through writ of habeas corpus petitions under U.S. common law. Section 3 surveys the options for recognition of animal personhood under Australian law, discussing issues of standing, habeas corpus, and guardianship models. Section 4 discusses the growing movement to assign legal personhood rights to natural resources. The article proposes that to the extent that natural resources have received legal personhood protection to recognize their inherent value, similar protections should be afforded to animals. In the meantime, habeas corpus, standing, and guardianship theories provide valuable procedural platforms for incremental progress toward protecting nonhuman animals in both the U.S. and Australia.",
author = "Abate, {Randall S} and Jonathan Crowe",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "5",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "54--78",
journal = "Global Journal of Animal Law",
issn = "2341-8168",
number = "1",

}

From inside the cage to outside the box : Natural resources as a platform for nonhuman animal personhood in the U.S. and Australia. / Abate, Randall S; Crowe, Jonathan.

In: Global Journal of Animal Law, Vol. 5, No. 1, 05.09.2017, p. 54-78.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - From inside the cage to outside the box

T2 - Natural resources as a platform for nonhuman animal personhood in the U.S. and Australia

AU - Abate, Randall S

AU - Crowe, Jonathan

PY - 2017/9/5

Y1 - 2017/9/5

N2 - Nonhuman animals are currently treated as property under U.S. and Australian law, leaving them open to various kinds of exploitation. There has been a gradual evolution away from this property paradigm in both countries, but significant work remains to ensure that nonhuman animals are afforded adequate legal protections. This article considers the legal avenues available to protect nonhuman animals in the U.S. and Australia, focusing particularly on the attribution of legal personhood. Section 2 of the article reviews attempts by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) to establish legal personhood protections for nonhuman animals through writ of habeas corpus petitions under U.S. common law. Section 3 surveys the options for recognition of animal personhood under Australian law, discussing issues of standing, habeas corpus, and guardianship models. Section 4 discusses the growing movement to assign legal personhood rights to natural resources. The article proposes that to the extent that natural resources have received legal personhood protection to recognize their inherent value, similar protections should be afforded to animals. In the meantime, habeas corpus, standing, and guardianship theories provide valuable procedural platforms for incremental progress toward protecting nonhuman animals in both the U.S. and Australia.

AB - Nonhuman animals are currently treated as property under U.S. and Australian law, leaving them open to various kinds of exploitation. There has been a gradual evolution away from this property paradigm in both countries, but significant work remains to ensure that nonhuman animals are afforded adequate legal protections. This article considers the legal avenues available to protect nonhuman animals in the U.S. and Australia, focusing particularly on the attribution of legal personhood. Section 2 of the article reviews attempts by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) to establish legal personhood protections for nonhuman animals through writ of habeas corpus petitions under U.S. common law. Section 3 surveys the options for recognition of animal personhood under Australian law, discussing issues of standing, habeas corpus, and guardianship models. Section 4 discusses the growing movement to assign legal personhood rights to natural resources. The article proposes that to the extent that natural resources have received legal personhood protection to recognize their inherent value, similar protections should be afforded to animals. In the meantime, habeas corpus, standing, and guardianship theories provide valuable procedural platforms for incremental progress toward protecting nonhuman animals in both the U.S. and Australia.

M3 - Article

VL - 5

SP - 54

EP - 78

JO - Global Journal of Animal Law

JF - Global Journal of Animal Law

SN - 2341-8168

IS - 1

ER -