Court Rules Bronx Zoo Elephant Isn’t A Person

Topline

The New York Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that Happy the elephant is not legally a “person,” and therefore is not being imprisoned in the Bronx Zoo, rejecting an animal rights group’s lawsuit seeking to move her to a more natural environment like an elephant sanctuary and sparking debate about the legal definition of “personhood.”

Key Facts

The Court of Appeals rejected the animal advocacy organization Nonhuman Rights Group’s habeas corpus case in a 5-2 decision.

Born in Thailand and transported to the U.S. when she was 1 year old, Happy has been at the Bronx Zoo for more than 40 years and has lived alone in a 1-acre enclosure since 2006 when her companion, Sammie, died, according to court documents.

The Nonhuman Rights Group argued in a letter to the Court of Appeals that Happy is an “autonomous and extraordinarily cognitively complex nonhuman animal who suffers terribly every day of her imprisonment.”

The Wildlife Conservation Society, which operates the zoo, denied the advocacy group’s claims, telling the New York Times in a statement that she is “well cared for by professionals with decades of experience and with whom she is strongly bonded.”

Key Background

The Nonhuman Rights Group, of which Jane Goodall is a founding member, first filed a petition to recognize Happy’s autonomy and release her to an elephant sanctuary in 2018. The group has filed similarly unsuccessful petitions for other animals, including chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko in 2013. Other countries have ruled in favor of animals’ personhood. In 2016, an Argentinian court ruled that a “chimpanzee is not a thing,” and that “great apes are legal persons, with legal capacity.” In 2018, a judge in India decided that the “entire animal kingdom” are “legal entities having a distinct persona with corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person.”

Surprising Fact

Scientists consider elephants to be extremely intelligent and social by nature. Happy was part of a 2006 study that determined elephants were able to recognize themselves in the mirror, which is rare in the animal kingdom. Happy was the first elephant to pass this “mirror self-recognition test.”

Key Quote

“No one disputes the impressive capabilities of elephants,” Chief Judge Janet DiFiore wrote in her decision. “Nothing in our precedent or, in fact, that of any other state or federal court, provides support for the notion that the writ of habeas corpus is or should be applicable to nonhuman animals.”

Contra

In his dissenting opinion, Judge Rowan D. Wilson wrote, “We should recognize Happy’s right to petition for her liberty not just because she is a wild animal who is not meant to be caged and displayed, but because the rights we confer on others define who we are as a society.”

Further Reading

Happy the Elephant Isn’t a Person, Top New York Court Rules (The New York Times)

The Elephant Who Could be a Person (The Atlantic)