Beyond the Cage: A Journey through Translation, Connection, and the Impact of Steve Wise’s Rattling the Cage
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36151/DALPS.038Keywords:
animal rights, legal status, moral personhood, non-human animals, animal lawAbstract
This paper examines the transformative impact of Steven M. Wise's 'Rattling the Cage.' It explores how this work has reshaped the legal discourse on nonhuman animal rights, challenging their traditional legal categorization as property and advocating for their recognition as legal persons.
Downloads
References
AILLÓN, V. Personal communication, April 10, 2024
ALBRIGHT, K.M. The Extension of Legal Rights to Animals under a Caring Ethic: An Ecofeminist Exploration of Steven Wise’s “Rattling the Cage,” Natural Resources Journal 42 (2002) 915.Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals, Steven M. Wise argues that nonhuman animals should be counted as persons under the law, therefore granting them legal standing in the American court system. Wise advocates the immediate extension of legal rights to chimpanzees and bonobos (pygmy chimpanzees
BERLINS, M. Race Dilemma for Judges, The Guardian, May 14 (2000) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/may/15/law.theguardian (last visited Mar 24, 2024).
CONTRERAS, C., MONTES, M. Derechos constitucionales para animales no humanos en Ecuador: el caso de Estrellita, la mona chorongo, Journal of Animal Law & Interdisciplinary Animal Welfare Studies / Revista general de Derecho Animal y estudios interdisciplinares de bienestar animal – ISSN 2531-2286 (2022), https://www.iustel.com/v2/revistas/detalle_revista.asp?id_noticia=425025 (last visited Apr 11, 2024).
DE BAGGIS, G. Arthur Bear’s Dilemma, Derecho Animal 7 (2016) 1.
EPSTEIN, R. The Dangerous Claims of the Animal Rights Movement, The Responsive Community 10 (2000) 28.
EVERETT, J. Book Review: Steve M. Wise. Foreward by Jane Goodall. Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals. Cambridge, Mass.: Perseus Books, 2000, Ethics & The Environment 7 (2002) 147, 148, 149.
Great Chain of Being – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics, https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/great-chain-of-being (last visited Apr 8, 2024).
HUTCHINS, M. Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals, 61 Animal Behaviour 855 (2001).
Legal challenges to animal experimentation, 3 Nature Neuroscience 523 (2000).
MONTES, M. Animal Personhood: The Quest for Recognition, Animal & Natural Resource Law Review (2021) 17, 93-150
MONTES, M. Legal Personhood: The Case of Chucho the Andean Bear, Journal of Animal Ethics 11 (2021) 36.
MONTES, M. Animal Personhood: A Legal and Moral Defense (2022) [Doctoral dissertation, Universitat Pompeu Fabra]. TDX. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/675950
MONTES FRANCESCHINI, M. & STILT, K. Estrellita the Woolly Monkey and the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court: Animal Rights Through the Rights of Nature, REVISTA, https://revista.drclas.harvard.edu/estrellita-the-wooly-monkey-and-the-ecuadorian-constitutional-court-animal-rights-through-the-rights-of-nature/ (last visited Apr 11, 2024).
NUSSBAUM, M. Animal Rights: The Need for a Theoretical Basis, Harvard Law Review 114 (2001) 1506.by Steven M. Wise, is reviewed. This review critiques Wise’s historical argument that both Aristotelian and Stoic thought have created a sharp dichotomy between humans and animals that still animates Anglo-American thought. The review also considers several alternative frameworks for structuring an approach to animal rights. Finally, Wise’s proposals for changing animal rights law are discussed and it is concluded that any constructive suggestions for incorporating these ideas into the common law require a carefully considered theoretical background.»,»container-title»:»Harvard Law Review»,»DOI»:»10.2307/1342686»,»ISSN»:»0017-811X»,»issue»:»5»,»language»:»eng»,»note»:»publisher-place: Cambridgenpublisher: Harvard Law Review Association»,»page»:»1506–1549»,»source»:»hollis.harvard.edu»,»title»:»Animal Rights: The Need for a Theoretical Basis»,»title-short»:»Animal Rights»,»volume»:»114»,»author»:[{«family»:»Nussbaum»,»given»:»Martha C.»}],»issued»:{«date-parts»:[[«2001»]]}}}],»schema»:»https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json»}
NUSSBAUM, M. Working with and for Animals: Getting the Theoretical Framework Right, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 19, 2, (2018) 3.
POSNER, R.A. Rattling the Cage: Towards Legal Rights for Animals, Yale Law Journal 110 (2000) 527.
SALZANI, C. Steve M. Wise Sacudiendo La Jaula: Hacia Los Derechos de Los Animales Tirant Lo Blanch (Valencia 2018) 394 p, Derecho Animal 9 (2018) 168, 178.
SUSTEIN, C. R. The Chimps’ Day in Court, New York Times Book Review 26 (2000).
Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc., on Behalf of Tommy v. Lavery, 31 N.Y.3d 1054, 1059 (N.Y. 2018) (Fahey, J., concurring).
Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. Breheny, 38 N.Y.3d 555, 588 (N.Y. 2022) (Wilson, J., dissenting).
Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. Breheny, 38 N.Y.3d 555, 642 (N.Y. 2022) (Rivera, J., dissenting).
SANTANA GORDIHLO, H. Personal communication, April 10, 2024
Suiça-Habeas Corpus | Animal Legal & Historical Center, https://www.animallaw.info/case/Suiça-habeas-corpus (last visited Apr 11, 2024).
WISE, S. Rattling The Cage: Toward Legal Rights For Animals (New York 2000) 4.
WISE, S. Rattling the Cage Defended, 43 B.C. L. REV. 623 (2001).
WISE, S. Drawing the line: Science and the case for animal rights (2002).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 DALPS (Derecho Animal-Animal Legal and Policy Studies)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
