Hide table of contents

Overview

These are my notes of the "Civil Litigation for Farmed Animals" from EAGxBerkeley, given by Alene Anello, president of Legal Impact for Chickens (LIC).

It was an excellent talk, exploring a front of the animal welfare movement that, in my opinion, has the potential to be extremely effective, and is very much neglected. (Would love to hear if you agree/disagree on this).

LIC also is currently hiring lawyers, so if you know someone who might be interested, let them know. This is a rare opportunity for folks with legal training to get professionally involved in the movement (those paid positions are hard to come by).

==================

Talk Notes

Intro

  • Premise: improving conditions on factory farms will go a long way towards helping chickens suffering
  • The law prohibits animal cruelty (in theory)
    • (Gave an excerpt from the California Penal Code)
  • Yet undercover investigations in farms expose such cruelty on a regular basis
  • Footnote on criminal laws: there are some states that have exemptions for animal agriculture
    • But not in California
    • Even states that have exemptions – it’s not for *every* kind of abuse. There’s a lot of stuff that happens in the farms that isn’t technically exempted
  • But police and prosecutors don’t really enforce it
    • And even when they do – it’s against individual workers and not the company/CEOs
      • Why? Not sure. Perhaps because it’s easier to go after someone with less power.
      • Attorney generals are almost always politicians (elected / politically appointed), which means they have an interest in keeping powerful companies happy
    • Some reasons for not enforcing at all:
      • A reason they often officially give: those are misdemeanors, and they’re more interested in pursuing felonies (also for funding reasons)
      • Possibly: corruption
      • Possibly:  “soft corruption” like not wanting to make powerful people angry
      • Resources and priorities

 

LIC’s Solution: “Creative” Civil Litigation

  • Not how civil litigation is usually works
  • Animal cruelty is a crime, would more “naturally” be handled by the criminal system – but since the criminal system doesn’t do anything, LIC looks for ways to bring it to civil litigations
  • LIC sues companies and executives

 

Example Cases

Example 1: Costco

  • Costco is not only a store but also breeds, raises and slaughters chickens (and sells the meat)
  • Bred them so fast that they could not even stand, eat, drink. Starved to death
  • That’s against the law – you’re required to feed your animals
  • There are some fiduciary duties – which are on the executives, personally, towards the company
    • One of them: “don’t break the law”
    •  If the executives haven’t fulfilled the duties – the company can sue them
      • Which wouldn’t usually happen because the execs control the company
      • But! The company also has owners. In the case of a publicly traded company – share holders
      • So LIC found Costco shareholders to work with
      • (Q: do you have to find existing share holders or can you just buy shares and then sue? A: Alene doesn’t know, there isn’t really a precedent).
  • Result:
    • The good news: the judge did say that the company has a responsibility re animal cruelty. Which means LIC can bring more cases like that!
    • The bad new: had a different interpretation to the law re what happened at Costco, so dismissed the case

 

Example 2: “Case Farms” – KFC supplier

  • Treated chicks as “dispensible”. Let machine drive over them etc. Pretty harrowing.
  • Happened in North California. Has a law against animal cruelty, with an exemption for food/poultry.
    • That was what CF’s defense was based on. That thereby anything they do is exempt.
    • LIC disagrees. If you kill the chicks they’re not really used for food.
  • This was dismissed and LIC appealed. Currently in the NC court of appeals.

 

Example 3: Rhode Island Beef and Veal

  • LIC looks for any way to make cruelty a liability.
  • Judges have a *lot* of leeway in sentencing. Can give a stricter/lesser sentence based on judgement call.
  • A slaughterhouse was sentenced. Criminal case.
  • “amicus brief” = a way for someone who’s not on a part in the lawsuit can submit a brief to the court on a specific lawsuit. For example if they’re an expert on the subject.
  • LIC submitted such a brief. 
  • Result:
    • Good news: the judge let them submit it (so they can now do that again for other cases). 
    • Bad news: sentence was still shorter than LIC thinks it should be.

 

Q&A

What are LIC’s bottlenecks?

  • Concerned about lack of undercover investigations to expose cruelty
  • Surprised to find that people working in the meat and egg industry hate the companies they work for
    • Could potentially help, tell them about cruelty that’s been happening
    • Had such workers reach out to them
    • Had ads target such workers, to reach out to LIC if they want to expose such cases
    • Alene thinks this would have happened a lot more if the workers weren’t frightened of the companies
      • Especially since a lot of them are undocumented workers

Why the focus on chickens?

  • (Disclaimer: they focus on chickens but do aim to help all farmed animals, e.g. example case 3 mentioned above)
  • Three reasons for the focus:
    • Scale: there are so many chickens that are treated so badly. More so than cows/pigs
    • Birds are more neglected than mammals
    • While the scale of chickens in animal ag is smaller than sea animals and insects – it will be probably too hard to do anything for them in court right now, because:
      • State laws don’t necessarily apply to them
      • Harder to get judges to “feel bad” for fish (chickens are hard enough) 
Comments5


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Thank you for sharing this; I am currently in law school and was feeling a bit pessimistic about the ability to pivot this opportunity into a career where I help farmed animals, but these notes are helping me see how the finer points of the legal system could be utilized to do just that!

I'm a recent law school grad. Feel free to DM me if you're still feeling pessimistic about it and want to chat.

If you feel like sharing publicly, I would be very interested to hear what you have to say, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

It wasn't one specific thing. When I was organizing for our law school EA group, I came across a lot of unexpected ways make an impact with a JD. I just wanted to put out an open invitation to chat with anyone feeling pessimistic about this path. Plus it's fun meeting other law people on here.

Thank you so much for posting this!!! You are amazing!!! <3 

Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Ronen Bar
 ·  · 10m read
 · 
"Part one of our challenge is to solve the technical alignment problem, and that’s what everybody focuses on, but part two is: to whose values do you align the system once you’re capable of doing that, and that may turn out to be an even harder problem", Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO (Link).  In this post, I argue that: 1. "To whose values do you align the system" is a critically neglected space I termed “Moral Alignment.” Only a few organizations work for non-humans in this field, with a total budget of 4-5 million USD (not accounting for academic work). The scale of this space couldn’t be any bigger - the intersection between the most revolutionary technology ever and all sentient beings. While tractability remains uncertain, there is some promising positive evidence (See “The Tractability Open Question” section). 2. Given the first point, our movement must attract more resources, talent, and funding to address it. The goal is to value align AI with caring about all sentient beings: humans, animals, and potential future digital minds. In other words, I argue we should invest much more in promoting a sentient-centric AI. The problem What is Moral Alignment? AI alignment focuses on ensuring AI systems act according to human intentions, emphasizing controllability and corrigibility (adaptability to changing human preferences). However, traditional alignment often ignores the ethical implications for all sentient beings. Moral Alignment, as part of the broader AI alignment and AI safety spaces, is a field focused on the values we aim to instill in AI. I argue that our goal should be to ensure AI is a positive force for all sentient beings. Currently, as far as I know, no overarching organization, terms, or community unifies Moral Alignment (MA) as a field with a clear umbrella identity. While specific groups focus individually on animals, humans, or digital minds, such as AI for Animals, which does excellent community-building work around AI and animal welfare while