ABSTRACT
As a possible counterpoint to the property status of animals in American and Canadian law, this chapter considers constitutional provisions to prevent cruelty to animals in Switzerland, Germany, Brazil, and India. To varying degrees, these provisions have challenged legal species boundaries through initiatives seeking to: (1) distinguish animals from things, (2) recognize nonhumans’ dignity, (3) grant animals personhood, and (4) establish animals as subjects of compassion. Although these provisions have been symbolically significant, the chapter argues that in almost all cases these initiatives have been interpreted through an anthropocentric lens and have had limited substantive impact. Demonstrating these limits in both European and non-European jurisdictions fulfills a secondary purpose of this chapter: it enables a comparison that combats the dominant representation of European (read Western) nations as superior to non-European (read non-Western) nations with respect to the treatment of animals. This is a representation that contributes to imperial lines of thinking and harms the animal advocacy movement.
