No area of the law or regulation creates more controversy and passion then anything linked to dogs, cats and other domestic pets and the lawsuit brought by Concerned Dog Owners of California (CDOC) against the City of Los Angeles over their mandatory spay and neuter regulations is no exception. Last year they filed a lawsuit to over turn the mandatory spay and neuter regulations imposed on all dog owners in the City, in which set dates for spay and neuter are established, civil and administrative penalties are outlined and entire categories of dog breeders, owners and hobbyists now fall under increasingly strict laws and oversight.

The questions raised in the suit look at the constitutional right of free association, the body of law in California regarding the right of the state to regulate animal ownership and standards and whether these regulations over reach in their goals to reduce the number of dogs and cat’s euthanized in shelters through out the city. We asked Attorney John Jensen, who is bringing this case to join us in studio along with Cathie Turner, the chairperson of CDOC to explain why they brought this suit, the perceived issues at stake and the relative merits of their case. We are also joined by David Frie, the voice of the annual Westminster Kennel Club dog show to discuss the historic roles of breed and kennel clubs in protecting dogs, avoiding needless euthanization of animals as well as a look at some of the issues surrounding this growing national movement to increasingly regulate dog ownership.

In this three video series, the Legal Broadcast Network examines an area of the law that is growing in importance and relevance to not only lawyers, but law makers, dog owners and breeders, that being the move by certain political and special interest groups to make mandatory spay and neuter laws part of the normal process of animal regulation in cities and states across the United States. While we touch on the motivation of these laws and the powerful lobby’s behind them in this series, we are more concerned at the network with the legal discussion of whether or not these laws, while well intended might in fact infringe on the rights of ordinary dog and pet owners to decide whether or not they wish to spay or neuter their animals.

It might seem like a fringe or novelty area of the law, but over 150 of the law schools in the United States now teach on animal law and given the American love affair with their pets, and the passionate advocacy on both sides of these issues, this looks to be a topic that is increasingly litigated in local, state and federal courts for years to come.

Video number one is Attorney John Jensen on the legal argument of the specific case of CDOC vs The City of Los Angeles.

Video number two is Cathie Turner, chairperson of Concerned Dog Owners of California discussing the legislative battle they are waging against the State of California and Senate bill 250 and their contention that these laws do not in fact save dogs from needless deaths, but in addition add substantial compliance and administrative costs to cities and towns at the very time when they are struggling with budget issues.

Video number three is David Frei of the Westminster Kennel Club, a long time dog breeder and advocate of responsible dog ownership discussing how mandatory spay and neuter laws can have unitended negative consequences on the dogs, responsible breeders and actually encourage “puppy mills” which is something breed clubs work to eliminate