The decision has sparked outrage among animal rights activists advocating for the liberation of animals held in captivity.
Elephants Remain in Captivity: US Court Denies Habeas Corpus Claim
Elephants Remain in Captivity: US Court Denies Habeas Corpus Claim
A ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court affirms elephants lack personhood rights under U.S. law.
In a landmark decision, the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that five elephants currently residing at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo cannot be deemed "persons" under the law, and thus do not qualify for habeas corpus protections that could grant them freedom. The ruling, which came down narrowly with a unanimous 6-0 vote, reinforces the legal precedent that rights are reserved for human beings and states that nonhuman animals, regardless of their cognitive or emotional sophistication, are excluded.
The case originated with the Nonhuman Rights Project (NRP), which presented the argument that Missy, Kimba, Lucky, LouLou, and Jambo were enduring conditions that constituted imprisonment and captivity. They sought to transfer the elephants to a sanctuary deemed more appropriate for their well-being, claiming that the animals exhibited severe signs of distress, trauma, and lack of freedom at the zoo.
The Court’s opinion, articulated by Justice Maria Berkenkotter, expressed empathy for the elephants but ultimately concluded that legal personhood—entitling beings to freedom—does not extend to animals. The decision sustains a previous ruling from a lower district court that had also declined to recognize the elephants as persons with rights.
In response to the ruling, Cheyenne Mountain Zoo defended its care of the elephants, labeling the NRP's legal action as frivolous and an abuse of the judicial system aimed at garnering funds through sensationalized legal battles. The zoo asserted that it has provided exceptional care for the elephants, making a case against the notion they are "imprisoned."
Conversely, the NRP expressed disappointment, stating that the ruling reflects a significant injustice. They likened their struggle for animal rights to other social justice movements, indicating that resistance is expected when challenging long-standing societal norms. Notably, this ruling follows a similar legal rejection involving Happy, an elephant at the Bronx Zoo, marking an ongoing battle for personhood and rights for nonhuman animals in the United States.
