- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Why the Court Should Free Happy
Inside Sources (2022)
Abstract
Should the law recognize an elephant’s right to be released from solitary confinement? The New York State Court of Appeals—the highest court in the State of New York—will consider this question on May 18. At issue is an Asian elephant named Happy. But happy she is not. Every human being has a right to bodily liberty because they have strong interests that this right protects. Since Happy has the same strong interests, the Court should recognize Happy’s right to be freed from solitary confinement.Author Profiles
Other Versions
No versions found
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
The Philosophers’ Brief on Elephant Personhood.Gary Comstock, G. K. D. Crozier, Andrew Fenton, Tyler John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert C. Jones, Nathan Nobis, David M. Peña-Guzmán, James Rocha, Bernard E. Rollin & Jeff Sebo - 2020 - New York State Appellate Court.
A Brief in Support of Happy’s Appeal.Gary Comstock, Adam Lerner & Peter Singer - 2022 - Nonhuman Rights Project.
The Philosophers' Brief in Support of Happy's Appeal.Gary Comstock, Sue Donaldson, Andrew Fenton, Tyler M. John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert C. Jones, Will Kymlicka, Letitia M. Meynell, Nathan Nobis, David M. Peña-Guzmán, James Rocha, Bernard Rollin, Jeff Sebo & Adam Shriver - 2021 - New York State Appellate Court.
Cudak v. Lithuania and the European Court of Human Rights Approach to the State Immunity Doctrine.Lijana Štarienė - 2010 - Jurisprudencija: Mokslo darbu žurnalas 120 (2):159-175.
Introduction to the Special Section.Franklin G. Miller - 2023 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 66 (1):1-2.
Gestational Surrogacy, Private Life and the European Court of Human Rights Case Law.Alfonso Ballesteros - 2024 - In José-Antonio Seone & Oscar Vergara, The Discourse of Biorights: European Perspectives. Cham: Springer Nature. pp. 161-175.
The Right to Judicial Defence in the Jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania.Armanas Abramavičius - 2009 - Jurisprudencija: Mokslo darbu žurnalas 117 (3):21-40.
Introduction.Wanda Teays - 2025 - In Solitary Confinement: Philosophical Perspectives. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. pp. 3-10.
Children, Parents and the State.Laurence D. Houlgate - 2017 - In Philosophy, Law and the Family: A New Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. pp. 203-225.
Abortion Access Persists, but So Do the Threats.Katie Watson - 2026 - Hastings Center Report 56 (1):5-5.
Analytics
Added to PP
2022-06-17
Downloads
880 (#65,103)
6 months
188 (#63,900)
2022-06-17
Downloads
880 (#65,103)
6 months
188 (#63,900)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
Try MATCHA Writer if you're interested in citing directly from PhilPapers and certifying your authorship.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation