Last month, the Michigan Supreme Court declined to take up a case brought by the Nonhuman Rights Project, a non-profit organization dedicated to securing animal rights, which argued that seven chimpanzees held in the DeYoung Family Zoo are entitled to habeas corpus rights under the law.
Dissenting from the denial to hear the case was Justice Elizabeth M. Welch, who argued that the case was worthy of being heard by the court. Justice Welch advances several arguments that contend chimpanzees should be treated as legal persons entitled to habeas corpus rights. Ultimately, though, her invitation to possibly expand legal personhood to chimpanzees via the judicial branch system proves unconvincing.
To many readers, the question of whether an animal can have habeas corpus rights may seem intuitively ridiculous. The doctrine of non-human personhood is not, though. Citizens United is the prime example of this, holding that a corporation has free speech rights. Reliance on text is insufficient to…
