It appears that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is not above learning from those it has targeted.
On April 27, 2010 the HSUS filed a ‘color of Law’ suit against Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, in conjunction with Michigan lawyer Beatrice M Friedlander. The basis for the alleging Ms. Friedlander’s rights are being violated because the Ohio state Constitution requires that signatures on ballot initiatives must be collected by Ohio residents.
Suddenly the HSUS is concerned with preservation of an individual’s Constitutional Rights? Did I miss a memo, or a press release?
What about the property rights of individuals who are having animals seized and dispersed by HSUS teams led by Scotlund Haisley, who has openly declared, “I want the scum to think we are law enforcement”. (Endorsed by HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle, “I like his (Scotlund’s) cowboy ways”)
- What about the rights of Norman Pang in Hawaii? (currently suing the HSUS for action “under color of law” citing violations of Mr Pang’s rights under the First, Fourth, Fifth & Fourteenth amendments)
- What about the rights of Dan Christiansen in South Dakota? (172 dogs seized by the HSUS “in conjunction with Second Chance Rescue and the Turner County Sheriff’s Department” on September 2, 2009 and ordered returned by the judge on May 4, 2010 because the dog’s were deemed taken illegally)
- What about the rights of Virginia Garwood in Indiana? (241 dogs seized with HSUS assistance on the premise of tax issues with a warrant ordering ‘seize such property, or any part thereof, found during such search and hold said property pending further order of this Court” Yet the dogs were sold to the HSUS within 24 hours and subsequently dispersed. This case is still before the courts)
- What about the rights of Louisville, Kentucky residents who were subjected to seizure of animals and loss of them if they couldn’t post the mandated seizure ‘bond’? (Struck down as illegal) The Louisville ordinances were used as a springboard for similar legislation that has been passed or is pending across the US. This has lead to significant speculation that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was heavily involved in the drafting of this legislation; especially since the HSUS regularly announces its involvement in the drafting in legislation across the US and dedicates significant resources to legislation and legal action.
All of these examples are cases involving (alleged) violations of FEDERAL constitutional rights with significant HSUS involvement.
So … is the HSUS only concerned about constitutional rights at the state level? Or do they only look to overturn constitutional law when their goals are affected? Are they going to change their actions to ensure that they respect the constitutional rights of individuals in their own actions? Are they going to assist the individuals above in defending their constitutional rights?
Anyone care to volunteer their thoughts on these questions and propose their own?