By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) – Five elderly African elephants at a Colorado zoo will remain there after the state’s highest court said the animals have no legal right to demand their release because they are not human.
The Colorado Supreme Court’s 6-0 decision Tuesday means Jambo, Kimba, LouLou, Lucky and Missy will remain at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs.
Following a similar decision by New York State’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, in 2022, another aging elephant, Happy, must remain at the Bronx Zoo in New York.
An animal rights group, the Nonhuman Rights Project, filed both cases on behalf of the elephants under a legal doctrine known as “habeas corpus,” saying the animals should live in sanctuaries.
Citing statements from seven animal biologists, the group told the Colorado court that elephants are highly social and mobile, share many cognitive abilities with humans, including empathy and self-awareness, and when confined in zoos can experience boredom and stress that can lead to to brain damage.
But the court said Colorado’s habeas law applies to persons, not nonhuman animals “no matter how cognitively, psychologically or socially sophisticated” they may be.
It also stated that the Nonhuman Rights Project’s concession during oral argument that it was only asking for different confinement, not complete freedom, was another reason for the elephants to be treated differently.
The case “does not affect our respect for these magnificent animals in general or these five elephants in particular,” Judge Maria Berkenkotter wrote. “Since an elephant is not a person, elephants here have no standing to file a habeas corpus petition.”
The Nonhuman Rights Project said in a statement that the decision “perpetuates a clear injustice” that condemns the five elephants to “a lifetime of mental and physical suffering.” He has not determined his next legal steps.
John Suthers, an attorney for the zoo, noted the court’s finding that lawmakers, not judges, are best placed to expand the legal rights of nonhuman animals.
Berkenkotter said counting those animals as people would be a “monumental change” that lawmakers would be expected to make explicit if they really meant it.
