Court Allows Breed Discrimination Lawsuit Against Denver to Proceed

by Ledy VanKavage · 2010-10-10 07:39:00 UTC
Topics:

Denver discriminates against dogs. It has since 1989. Indeed, Denver is wasting oodles of taxpayer dollars on a lawsuit defending their right to engage in canine profiling. If I lived in Denver, I'd be outraged; I live in Illinois and avoid Denver because of the discrimination.

The lawsuit is Dias, et al. v. City and County of Denver. Plaintiff attorney Karen Breslin is a crusader tired of her clients' pets being killed. Denver filed a motion for summary judgment, hoping to win without a trial, but on Sept. 29 Denver's motion for was rightly denied by United States Senior District Judge Walker Miller. Now there is no quick end to the lawsuit — or Denver's extermination of dogs — in sight.

The case arose because of a Denver ordinance banning American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers, and any dog exhibiting a majority of the breeds' distinguishing characteristics within the Denver city limits. Pretty broad definition, don't you think? What exactly is a majority of the breeds' distinguishing characteristics? A blocky head? Short hair? Muscular? A tail? Come on. Now that we have new evidence through doggy DNA that shows animal control is correct only 25 percent of the time guessing a mixed-breed dog's heritage, you might think Denver's politicians would repeal their ordinance. They haven't. They've dug in and are defending it.

The plaintiffs contend that the ordinance violates the 14th Amendment because it deprives them of substantive due process. They have a point. In fact, the Colorado Legislature passed a law in 2004 prohibiting Colorado municipalities and counties from enacting breed-specific legislation because it is unfair and ineffective. Unfortuantely, Denver is a home-rule community and, under the Colorado Constitution, doesn't have to abide by state law.

It's clear there is a case here. The experts disagree regarding the facts. Defendant's expert Alan M. Beck, Sc.D., asserts that the description of Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Bull Terrier suffices to describe pit bulls for the ordinance and believes the dogs are frequent biters.

Contradicting Beck's testimony are Dr. Karen Overall and Dr. Randall Lockwood. In Dr. Overall's deposition, she stated, "People need to stop thinking about breeds because they think they are all the same, and start thinking about individual dogs and the factors that can cause serious damage in a bite."

Dr. Lockwood agreed with Overall, stating that the breed of a dog is not a predictor that a dog will atttack or bite. Dr. Lockwood notes that the more popular a dog, the more frequent the incident of bites by that breed of dog. He further states that Beck misused a Centers for Disease Control study to extrapolate breed-specific characteristics and that the American Veterinary Medical Association disagrees with Beck.

So the litigation marches on. Each day in Denver, pit-bull-type dogs are seized and killed simply because of their appearance. Denver right now is simply not a dog-friendly city. Sign the petition and send a message to the city council that they should repeal their breed-discriminatory law. Until they do, stay out of Denver.

Photo Credit: Best Friends Animal Society

Ledy VanKavage has worked extensively on behalf of animals for over 25 years. She is currently the Senior Legislative Attorney for Best Friends Animal Society.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Vet Says Being Outdoors Is Unhealthy for Chickens
NEXT STORY:
Petitions Delivered Around the World for Release of Indonesian Circus Dolphins

COMMENTS (3)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.