Thanks for having me! Excellent editorial judgment on the quotes you pulled for the promos.

Read more about the Nonhuman Rights Project’s involvement at www.nonhumanrights.org/blog/califor...

5/5

But, as we argue, ensuring the common law’s just and rational development is a core responsibility of thecourts. In the words of the California Supreme Court: “Courts [must] remain alert to their obligation and opportunity to change the common law when reason and equity demand it.” 

4/

Also at stake in this appeal is the critically important question: who decides whether animals matter? The prosecution is arguing that only the legislature can expand the necessity defense to prevent animal cruelty.

/3

The legal principle at stake transcends any single case. It goes to the heart of how our legal system views animals. Are they “things” or are they beings who matter? 

/2

(For anybody looking for the opinion you can find it here: Deblase v. Hill, 2025 WL 1696814, Supreme Court of New York for Kings County, Index No. 522689/2023 (June 17, 2025))

Today’s recognition by the NY Supreme Court for Kings County that Duke was a family member shows the justice system at its best: fulfilling its fundamental duty to deliver justice based on facts and reason rather than an antiquated legal fiction that animals are mere things.

🧵/🧵

Companion animal familial status shares a deep conceptual synergy with the NhRP's habeas corpus cases because both depend on the same legal principles: "the evolving legal status of nonhuman animals, the role and duty of common law courts, and the fundamental demands of justice[.]"

/6

The Court thus found that Duke was a member of the family under the circumstances: "This Court believes that 'a pet such as a dog is not just a thing' and [Plaintiff] 'is entitled to damages beyond the market value' of Duke[.]" (citations omitted)

/5

nonhumanrights.org/wp-content/u...

The Court agreed on framework: "Ultimately, if a trial court perceives a change in law, it is morally obligated to recognize it" and must "interpre[t] and appl[y] law to align with evolving societal norms while remaining faithful to the original intent."

/4

www.nonhumanrights.org/wp-content/u...

The Nonhuman Rights Project authored two amicus briefs arguing that courts are not just able to evolve common law to do justice, but have a responsibility to do so.

3/

www.nonhumanrights.org/wp-content/u...

The facts alleged: Plaintiff was walking the family dog, Duke, when driver ran a stop sign hitting and killing Duke in front of plaintiff who narrowly escaped danger herself. Plaintiff sought emotional damages. Driver argued dogs are just property. Court sought amicus briefing to resolve.

2/

Thank you for the suggestions! Added @animallawyersuk.bsky.social, @evabernetkempers.bsky.social, @charlotteblattner.bsky.social, @joyfulgrowth.bsky.social, @dorfonlaw.bsky.social, @drjoshdoeslaw.bsky.social, @valerygiroux.bsky.social

⚖️❤️

Adding animal law superstars @njacewicz.bsky.social, @raffaelfasel.bsky.social, and @animalrightslaw.bsky.social

✨🐂⚖️

CO’s highest court heard arguments made by NhRP for right the liberty of 5 elephants held captive in the Cheyenne Mt Zoo.The key issue before the 6 justices is whether CO common law protects an individual’s rt to liberty even if they aren’t human nonhumanrightsproject.donorsupport.co/page/endofye...