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) 

59

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

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
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