Product Description
The ability to protest peacefully and to voice unpopular opinions without being arrested and imprisoned arbitrarily are cornerstones of the U.S. Constitution, and are the reasons why, in spite of the many limitations imposed upon sectors of its society over the centuries, the dominant order has been forced to change to allow people of color, women, and others to take their place in society.
Animals raised for their flesh or body products, however, remain without even the most basic natural rights: to move around, to associate with their conspecifics, to breathe clean air, and to nest or wallow or graze. They have no choice but to rely, as do all non-human animals, on human beings to speak up for them and articulate those basic rights, as well as to challenge those who are either indifferent to, or actively complicit in harming, their welfare.
Since the passage of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) in 2006, however, the ability to document abuses, draw attention to the horrors, and raise public awareness about the suffering of animals in factory farms or scientific laboratories has been substantially curtailed. Muzzling a Movement is an in-depth and tightly argued analysis of the case of the SHAC-7, the organization whose supposed activities ultimately led to the passage of the AETA. Lawyer Dara Lovitz reveals the history behind the AETA, examines the tendentious and speculative government case against the SHAC activists, and in so doing shows how the U.S. government has deeply compromised the freedom of speech and protest enshrined in the Constitution.
Animals raised for their flesh or body products, however, remain without even the most basic natural rights: to move around, to associate with their conspecifics, to breathe clean air, and to nest or wallow or graze. They have no choice but to rely, as do all non-human animals, on human beings to speak up for them and articulate those basic rights, as well as to challenge those who are either indifferent to, or actively complicit in harming, their welfare.
Since the passage of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) in 2006, however, the ability to document abuses, draw attention to the horrors, and raise public awareness about the suffering of animals in factory farms or scientific laboratories has been substantially curtailed. Muzzling a Movement is an in-depth and tightly argued analysis of the case of the SHAC-7, the organization whose supposed activities ultimately led to the passage of the AETA. Lawyer Dara Lovitz reveals the history behind the AETA, examines the tendentious and speculative government case against the SHAC activists, and in so doing shows how the U.S. government has deeply compromised the freedom of speech and protest enshrined in the Constitution.
About the Author
Dara Lovitz is an Adjunct Professor of Animal Law at Temple University Beasley School of Law and the Earle Mack School of Law at Drexel University. She received the designation of Rising Star by the Super Lawyers magazine. She earned her B.A., magna cum laude, from the University of Pennsylvania and her J.D. from Temple University Beasley School of Law, at which she was the recipient of both the Law Faculty Scholarship and the Barrister Award.
Ms. Lovitz served as special prosecutor in Commonwealth v. Esbenshade, the pivotal Pennsylvania case in which the Court determined the criminal liability of an egg factory owner and supervisor. She is a board member of Four Feet Forward and Peace Advocacy Network.
In addition to serving as counsel for animal advocacy organizations, she is also an active member, organizing several fund-raising endeavors and participating in various anti-circus and anti-horse-carriage demonstrations in the Philadelphia area.
Ms. Lovitz has written and lectured extensively on a variety of animal law topics, including eco-terror laws, most notably the 2007 Michigan State University law journal article, Animal Lovers and Tree Huggers are the New Cold-Blooded Criminals?: Examining the Flaws of Ecoterrorism Bills.
Ms. Lovitz served as special prosecutor in Commonwealth v. Esbenshade, the pivotal Pennsylvania case in which the Court determined the criminal liability of an egg factory owner and supervisor. She is a board member of Four Feet Forward and Peace Advocacy Network.
In addition to serving as counsel for animal advocacy organizations, she is also an active member, organizing several fund-raising endeavors and participating in various anti-circus and anti-horse-carriage demonstrations in the Philadelphia area.
Ms. Lovitz has written and lectured extensively on a variety of animal law topics, including eco-terror laws, most notably the 2007 Michigan State University law journal article, Animal Lovers and Tree Huggers are the New Cold-Blooded Criminals?: Examining the Flaws of Ecoterrorism Bills.
