I think within five years, we will absolutely see… the first nonhuman animals recognized as holders of rights in the US; ‘persons’... [I don’t think] the gates [would be] flung open if we start to see one or two species recognized as having rights… I don’t see this at all as a linear path. We file the cases that we do and the work that we do and hope to achieve discrete outcomes, but we’re also very mindful of the fact that other judges [cite] us in cases that we don’t file… We’ve seen more and more judges citing our cases approvingly to say, ‘look, the relationship between humans and animals is changing; we need to take their interests more seriously’- Kevin SchneiderThe Nonhuman Rights Project has litigated in US courts for four chimpanzees and four elephants. But can litigation for a small number of animals drive a wider expansion of the moral circle? What are the risks of this approach? How can animal advocates maximize the chances of positive impact for animals while pursuing this strategy?Since 2015, Kevin Schneider has been the executive director of the Nonhuman Rights Project, previously having worked in private legal practice.Topics discussed in the episode:The NhRP’s plans for legislative campaigns (5:05)Whether litigation should focus on farmed animals or chimpanzees and elephants (13:28)How legal change interacts with public opinion and wider social change (29:00)The insights from forthcoming public polling supported by the NhRP on rights for particular species, and the implications of this (37:28)The decisions made by the NhRP in selecting particular states and legal strategies to focus on (46:49)How litigating for legal personhood for animals compares to enforcing and expanding the scope of existing legal protections for animals (1:00:30)What the NhRP has learned from its study of historical social movements and the risks of using this sort of evidence (1:08:03)The NhRP’s priorities for media coverage (1:13:08)How the NhRP interacts with advocates in other countries (1:32:08)Why the NhRP is not greatly constrained by either funding or by a lack of talented applicants to their job roles (1:42:33)How current legal professionals might (or might not) be able to help the NhRP (1:47:04)Why Kevin doesn’t believe that there is much scope for new organizations to do similar work to the NhRP elsewhere in the US (1:51:00)How someone could best prepare to be an excellent candidate for a role at the NhRP and how Kevin’s own career experiences have affected his work (1:59:12)Which professional legal experience might be most useful for animal advocates (2:04:40)Resources discussed in the episode:Resources by or about the NhRP:The NhRP’s article in the Syracuse Law Review on home ruleSteven Wise of the NhRP’s book, Rattling the CageThe litigation cases of the NhRPAnimal Charity Evaluators’ review of the NhRPSteven Wise of the NhRP’s book, Steven Wise, Though the Heavens May Fall, on the 1772 Somerset v. Stewart caseThe documentary on the NhRP’s work, Unlocking the CageSupport the show

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related