Dear EA Forum readers,

The EA charity, Legal Impact for Chickens (LIC), just filed our second lawsuit!

As many of you know, LIC is a litigation nonprofit dedicated to making factory-farm cruelty a liability.  We focus on chickens because of the huge numbers in which they suffer and the extreme severity of that suffering.  

Today, we sued one of the country’s largest poultry producers and a KFC supplier, Case Farms, for animal cruelty.  

The complaint comes on the heels of a 2021 undercover investigation by Animal Outlook, revealing abuse at a Morganton, N.C. Case Farms hatchery that processes more than 200,000 chicks daily.  

Our lawsuit attacks the notion that Big Ag is above the law.  We are suing under North Carolina's 19A statute, which lets private parties enjoin animal cruelty. 

Case Farms was documented knowingly operating faulty equipment, including a machine piston which repeatedly smashes chicks to death and a dangerous metal conveyor belt which traps and kills young birds.  Case Farms was also documented crushing chicks’ necks between heavy plastic trays. 

Case Farms supplies its chicken to KFC, Taco Bell, and Boar’s Head, among other customers.

Thank you so much to all the EA Forum readers who helped make this happen, by donating to, and volunteering for, Legal Impact for Chickens!

Sincerely,

Alene

148

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments13


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Thank you for the work you're doing!

How's the first lawsuit going?

Thank you so much, Guy!!  Sadly, the judge dismissed the Costco lawsuit.  :-(  

I'm really sad to hear that! Is the court's decision available somewhere?

Yeah it stinks.  The judge just ruled from the bench—He didn't author a written opinion.

Yikes

Oh no! I think it would be good to write a short postmortem about what LIC learned from this experience. For example, do you think derivative suits are simply not the right vehicle for this kind of action, or is there still potential there?

Don't work for LIC, but I'd note that litigation strategy is one area in which the justification for non-transparency can be particularly strong. E.g., if LIC decided derivative suits were the wrong vehicle, I'm not sure I'd want them to publicize that and free any potential target companies from the fear that they could be next.

Thank you for your support Eli!  I think derivative suits definitely are still a strong vehicle to protect animals.  Neither the court nor the defendants said anything that would cause us to become less bullish on derivative suits.  And the court agreed that the board members had knowledge of Costco's treatment of animals, which was one of the things we were trying to prove in order to show why this is the board's responsibility and thus why a derivative suit is appropriate.  Unfortunately, however, the court didn't agree that we had shown a violation of the criminal law against animal neglect.  (Of course, we still think that we did show illegal animal neglect.  So I think this was a failure on my part to properly convey why the evidence constituted neglect.)

The court left open one avenue, which was to send a formal demand letter to Costco's board, asking the board to change its treatment of chickens and sue Costco's executives.  So we did that:  https://www.legalimpactforchickens.org/costco-demand.   And we are waiting for a response.

I agree we need to somehow update our website.  I just haven't gotten around to figuring out the best way to present this information. . . . But you bringing it up is a helpful nudge!

Thank you Alene! Happy to chat offline if it's ever helpful to you or LIC.

Whoa, this is huge! Major props to you and the LIC team for stepping up and taking the fight directly to the big guys like Case Farms. It's really inspiring to see you using the legal system as a tool to protect animals. I'm on eager to see how this case unfolds!

I've just watched the undercover video from the Animal Outlook investigation that your case will be based on, and it's a stark reminder of the harsh realities we're fighting against. I think we sometimes lose sight of the actual suffering behind the numbers and strategies we discuss on the EA Forum. So, I strongly recommend everyone here to take a few minutes to watch this video to remind ourselves of what suffering looks like on the ground.

For those who can't or choose not to watch it, here's a brief description of what it reveals:
 

Newly-hatched chicks killed, mangled, maimed or trapped in equipment or machinery that was improperly operated or set up. 

  • Some chicks were not mangled by machines but were deformed, hatched improperly, hatched early and died, etc.
  • Chicks being roughly handled, thrown, having plastic trays dragged across them and crushing their throats, and driven over with machinery.
  • Injured or deformed chicks in trays with dead ones left to languish for hours. 
  • Gassing sick or injured birds before dumping them into a macerator to be sliced and rendered; in some instances, dumping fully conscious chicks into the macerator to be ground alive.

Alene, your work is reminding us of the urgency and significance of this cause. Please continue to keep us posted on your progress and victories.

Keep fighting the good fight!

Thank you so much Constance!

Fai
14
1
1

Thank you for doing it! All the best with it.

Our lawsuit attacks the notion that Big Ag is above the law.

And I want to mention that I particularly like this.

Thank you Fai!!!!

Curated and popular this week
Ben_West🔸
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
> Summary: We propose measuring AI performance in terms of the length of tasks AI agents can complete. We show that this metric has been consistently exponentially increasing over the past 6 years, with a doubling time of around 7 months. Extrapolating this trend predicts that, in under a decade, we will see AI agents that can independently complete a large fraction of software tasks that currently take humans days or weeks. > > The length of tasks (measured by how long they take human professionals) that generalist frontier model agents can complete autonomously with 50% reliability has been doubling approximately every 7 months for the last 6 years. The shaded region represents 95% CI calculated by hierarchical bootstrap over task families, tasks, and task attempts. > > Full paper | Github repo Blogpost; tweet thread. 
Joris 🔸
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
Last week, I participated in Animal Advocacy Careers’ Impactful Policy Careers programme. Below I’m sharing some reflections on what was a really interesting week in Brussels! Please note I spent just one week there, so take it all with a grain of (CAP-subsidized) salt. Posts like this and this one are probably much more informative (and assume less context). I mainly wrote this to reflect on my time in Brussels (and I capped it at 2 hours, so it’s not a super polished draft). I’ll focus mostly on EU careers generally, less on (EU) animal welfare-related careers. Before I jump in, just a quick note about how I think AAC did something really cool here: they identified a relatively underexplored area where it’s relatively easy for animal advocates to find impactful roles, and then designed a programme to help these people better understand that area, meet stakeholders, and learn how to find roles. I also think the participants developed meaningful bonds, which could prove valuable over time. Thank you to the AAC team for hosting this! On EU careers generally * The EU has a surprisingly big influence over its citizens and the wider world for how neglected it came across to me. There’s many areas where countries have basically given a bunch (if not all) of their decision making power to the EU. And despite that, the EU policy making / politics bubble comes across as relatively neglected, with relatively little media coverage and a relatively small bureaucracy. * There’s quite a lot of pathways into the Brussels bubble, but all have different ToCs, demand different skill sets, and prefer different backgrounds. Dissecting these is hard, and time-intensive * For context, I have always been interested in “a career in policy/politics” – I now realize that’s kind of ridiculously broad. I’m happy to have gained some clarity on the differences between roles in Parliament, work at the Commission, the Council, lobbying, consultancy work, and think tanks. * The absorbe
Max Taylor
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
Many thanks to Constance Li, Rachel Mason, Ronen Bar, Sam Tucker-Davis, and Yip Fai Tse for providing valuable feedback. This post does not necessarily reflect the views of my employer. Artificial General Intelligence (basically, ‘AI that is as good as, or better than, humans at most intellectual tasks’) seems increasingly likely to be developed in the next 5-10 years. As others have written, this has major implications for EA priorities, including animal advocacy, but it’s hard to know how this should shape our strategy. This post sets out a few starting points and I’m really interested in hearing others’ ideas, even if they’re very uncertain and half-baked. Is AGI coming in the next 5-10 years? This is very well covered elsewhere but basically it looks increasingly likely, e.g.: * The Metaculus and Manifold forecasting platforms predict we’ll see AGI in 2030 and 2031, respectively. * The heads of Anthropic and OpenAI think we’ll see it by 2027 and 2035, respectively. * A 2024 survey of AI researchers put a 50% chance of AGI by 2047, but this is 13 years earlier than predicted in the 2023 version of the survey. * These predictions seem feasible given the explosive rate of change we’ve been seeing in computing power available to models, algorithmic efficiencies, and actual model performance (e.g., look at how far Large Language Models and AI image generators have come just in the last three years). * Based on this, organisations (both new ones, like Forethought, and existing ones, like 80,000 Hours) are taking the prospect of near-term AGI increasingly seriously. What could AGI mean for animals? AGI’s implications for animals depend heavily on who controls the AGI models. For example: * AGI might be controlled by a handful of AI companies and/or governments, either in alliance or in competition. * For example, maybe two government-owned companies separately develop AGI then restrict others from developing it. * These actors’ use of AGI might be dr