Support Legislation To Stop Dogfighting.

The last part of the Final Farm Bill.
In early 2007, after a six-year campaign by The Humane Society of the United States, Congress enacted a law to upgrade the penalties for interstate movement of animals for fighting, from a misdemeanor to a felony, and also to ban the interstate commerce in cockfighting weapons. In the wake of the high-profile indictment of NFL quarterback Michael Vick on federal dogfighting charges, and the national outrage over dogfighting crimes, new legislation has been proposed to further strengthen the nation’s laws to combat the cruel practice of dogfighting.


Three bills—S.1880, introduced by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA); H.R. 3219, the Dog Fighting Prohibition Act, by Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH); and H.R. 3327, the Federal Dog Protection Act, by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) and Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)—would make all participation in dogfighting, including being a spectator at a dogfight and possessing dogs for the purpose of fighting, a federal felony, and would increase the maximum penalty from three years to five years in prison. The Humane Society of the United States urges members of Congress to support S. 1880, H.R. 3219, and H.R. 3327.


Dogfighting is an inhumane and barbaric activity. In a typical fight, dogs are drugged to heighten their aggression and forced to keep fighting even after suffering broken legs, puncture wounds, dehydration, severe blood loss, and shock – all for the amusement and illegal wagering of handlers and spectators. Dogfighting is also associated with other criminal conduct, such as drug traffic, illegal firearms use, and violence toward people. Children are often present at these spectacles. Some dogfighters steal pets to use as bait for training their dogs; some allow trained fighting dogs to roam neighborhoods and endanger the public. A federal dogfighting ban is warranted. As demonstrated in the Vick indictment – and by the many law enforcement records, animal welfare reports, and economic studies – the dogfighting industry has become nationwide in scope, and Congress is well within its authority to address both the nationwide framework and localized branches that are a critical part of that extensive criminal venture.


In 2005, the Supreme Court made clear in Gonzales v. Raich that Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause extends to local activities that are an integral component of interstate criminal activities. The high-stakes gambling, sales of fighting dogs for as much as tens of thousands of dollars per animal, sale of “stud” privileges for mating with winning dogs, traffic in specialized equipment to train and house fighting dogs, handling, training, and courier services to transport dogs to matches are among the ways that dogfighting – an inherently commercial and economic activity – substantially affects interstate commerce. In addition, dogfighting burdens interstate commerce by increasing the risk of injury or disease to both animals and humans, including dog bites, rabies, heartworms, and harm to stolen pets used as bait, as well as the enormous financial burden that dogfighting puts on animal shelters as they struggle to care for abandoned fighting dogs.