Judge weighs PETA whale slavery lawsuit
Written by SAN DIEGO — A federal judge appeared skeptical Monday of arguments that the killer whales that perform at SeaWorld are being held as slaves and that their confinement violates the constitutional ban on slavery. After an hour of arguments, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller said he would take the case under advisement and issue a ruling later on the lawsuit.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals filed the suit in October in federal court in San Diego. It is the first of its kind to contend that an animal — in this case, wild-caught orcas — are entitled to protection under the U.S. Constitution.
PETA’s lawyer, Jeff Kerr, said after Monday’s hearing that it was a “historic day,” marking the first time a court considered the question of whether animals can be enslaved.
But SeaWorld’s lawyers said the case should be thrown out because it has no merit.
“There are boundaries to legitimate constitutional debate,” said Theodore Shaw, a lawyer for the amusement park that has venues in San Diego, Orlando, Fla., and San Antonio. “And PETA’s complaint has crossed those boundaries.”
Shaw contended that no court has ever recognized animals have the legal right — a concept known as standing — to sue. On that basis alone, he said, the case should be dismissed.
He called the suit “utterly lacking in legal merit,” adding that the 13th Amendment banning slavery referred to “persons,” and not animals.
A ruling that would say animals are protected by the 13th Amendment would create havoc, Shaw said. Pets, dogs used to assist the disabled and even canines used for security could conceivably be covered, he said.
PETA’s lawyer said such arguments were hysterical. Kerr said the suit seeks only to cover the killer whales at Sea World.
Judge Miller closely questioned Kerr about whether any court has recognized the standing of animals to bring a suit. He also asked several pointed questions about the history of the 13th Amendment, and how it was intended to apply only to humans held in slavery when it was adopted in 1865.
Kerr acknowledged no court has said animals have the right to sue but argued the same was true in the past for other groups, such as African-Americans and women. They also were denied standing until the courts eventually recognized their right to sue, he said.
While Shaw argued a bewildering variety of claims could be filed if animals are protected by the Constitution, Kerr tried to convince the judge the lawsuit was narrowly drawn.
It applies only to the unique circumstances of orcas, Kerr said. But Miller pressed him on whether other animals — such as whales used in medical research or animals used by the military — would also be covered.
Kerr said that the suit would apply only to the whales “held for amusement” in the SeaWorld parks.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of five whales, three of which are based at the San Diego park and the others at the Orlando park.
In a statement after the hearing, SeaWorld said PETA was engaged in a “publicity stunt” and that the suit was “baseless and in many ways offensive.”
