Claim: An amendment inserted by lawmakers into the state budget "exempts scientific researchers from all state animal cruelty laws.
Verdict: SUPPORTS

Retrieved passages:
title: 2017 pro-jallikattu protests
text: Khurshid's view, as federal laws such as the PCA are always more powerful than state laws, and in that respect the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act of 2017 is not much different from the 2009 one. On 24 January, in light of the new Tamil Nadu legislation, the Centre withdrew its notification allowing the sport; this means that any new legal challenges will be directed against the new legislation. For its part, PETA India has said that it will "study" the new ordinance, and has not ruled out a challenge to the new law on the

title: Animal welfare in the United States
text: The law also requires research facilities to be able to describe painful practices as well as implement practices that minimize pain and stress to the animals. Another requirement made under this law was for each research facility to establish an Institutional Animal Care committee to oversee research proposals and provide oversight of animal experimentation. In 1990, The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 was amended by adding SEC. 2503, Protection of Pets (Pub.L. 101–624). This section established a holding period for cats and dogs of not less than 5 days at a holding facility of the dealer, so

title: Steve King
text: "Humane Scorecard". Afterward, he put out a video clarifying his position, stating that it would be putting animals above humans if it were legal to watch humans fight but not animals. In July 2012, King introduced an amendment to the House Farm Bill that would legalize previously banned animal agriculture practices such as tail-docking, putting arsenic in chicken feed, and keeping impregnated pigs in small crates. "My language wipes out everything they've done with pork and veal," King said of his amendment. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) President Wayne Pacelle said the measure could nullify "any laws

title: Dognapping
text: cars and cattle across state lines. The American Humane Society presented evidence of dog theft rings in Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York; and another witness stated that boys were being paid $2 for each dog they delivered to a dealer. Medical research organisations sought to change the bill by removing references to animals other than cats or dogs, saying that: "It would impose a well-nigh impossible burden to regulate traffic in fish, frogs, turtles, reptiles, birds and the many other mammalian forms used in laboratories." The senate was reported to have received more mail on the dognapping bill

title: Brown Dog affair
text: Medical Journal" objected, so additional protection was introduced instead. The result was the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, criticized by NAVS as "infamous but well-named". The Act stipulated that researchers could not be prosecuted for cruelty, but that the animal must be anaesthetized unless the anaesthesia would interfere with the point of the experiment. Each animal could be used only once, although several procedures were permitted if they were regarded as part of the same experiment. The animal had to be killed when the study was over, unless doing so would frustrate the object of the experiment. Prosecutions could take

title: John Lesch
text: the proper treatment of animals. On May 21, 2014, Minnesota became the first state to pass the "Beagle Freedom Bill". Included in the omnibus supplemental budget bill, authors Sen. Scott Dibble and Rep. John Lesch link taxpayer-funded laboratories and educational institutions that use dogs and cats for research with nonprofit animal rescues. The animals can be placed for adoption when they are no longer needed for research. In February 2006, Lesch made a personal trip to Iraq at his own expense with the stated intention of learning as much as possible about the conflict in as short a time as

title: Animal Legal Defense Fund
text: highway project, and vowed to use safer construction methods after settling with ALDF and conservation groups. In July, ALDF filed the first lawsuit in the nation to challenge the constitutionality of an ag gag law. Utah’s law, which criminalizes the videotaping on factory farms, attacks activity protected under the U.S. Constitution’s First and Fourteenth Amendments. In a groundbreaking end to its false advertising lawsuit against New York-based Hudson Valley Foie Gras, the national nonprofit Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) is celebrating the company’s decision to stop advertising its products as “humane.” In July eleven bears were removed from gladiator-style bear

title: Animal Welfare Institute
text: the Compassion Index (CI). Available online at Compassion Index, the frequently updated electronic tally system rates legislators based on their involvement or lack thereof on certain animal welfare measures. AWI opposed the Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act of 2014 (S. 2363; 113th Congress), calling it "an attack on our nation's wild animals and habitat." According to the organization, the bill would "eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency's authority under the Toxic Substances Control Act to regulate hazardous substances – including lead, a dangerous neurotoxin – released by ammunition and sport fishing waste." AWI launched its Animal Welfare Approved (AWA) standards program in Fall

title: Animal Welfare Act of 1966
text: medical [sic] research be respected and that administrative enforcement govern the Animal Welfare Act. In 1998, a court case was argued on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund vs Daniel Glickman (the Secretary of Agriculture), for the inhumane treatment of a primate named Barney at a Long Island Game Farm Park and Zoo. A man name Marc Jurnove had visited this park on a regular basis and noticed this primate had been neglected. He filed suit against the USDA for failing to meet the minimum standards under the AWA and his allegations were supported by investigations. The U.S. Court

title: Animal Welfare Act of 1966
text: but conditions of funding. Certain conditions are also excluded from coverage by AWA. Animals that are killed prior to usage, such as frogs used in a biology class, are also not included, so long as they are killed humanely. Facilities that do not receive Federal funding, such as bear armories, were also not covered by the Act. In January 2015 Michael Moss of "The New York Times" published an exposé on the alleged mistreatment of research animals at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. Among other things, Moss's article asserted that the center had no veterinarians on its staff, with

title: Jallikattu
text: resolved if the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act is amended as local ordinances and state laws cannot trump Indian federal law. According to "The Hindu", many other Indian legal experts agreed with Khurshid's view, as federal laws such as the PCA are always more powerful than state laws, and in that respect the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act of 2017 is not much different from the state law overturned in 2009. For its part, PETA India has said that it will "study" the new ordinance, and has not ruled out a challenge to the new

title: Elton Gallegly
text: profit from animal cruelty. However, on April 20, 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States, in an 8-1 ruling written by Chief Justice John Roberts, overturned Gallegly's law on the ground that the law violated the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, and created a "criminal prohibition of alarming breadth." In his defense, Gallegly argued that the bill he wrote contained "exceptions for religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, and artistic expression [that] may have provided too many loopholes within the legislation. Bob Stevens was convicted of committing animal cruelty as defined by the law, but claimed that his

title: Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986
text: experiments licensed under the 1986 Act. The 1986 Act defined "regulated procedures" as animal experiments that could potentially cause "pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm", to "protected animals", which encompassed all living vertebrates other than humans, under the responsibility of humans. A 1993 amendment added a single invertebrate species, the common octopus ("Octopus vulgaris"), as a protected animal. The Act applied only to protected animals from halfway through their gestation or incubation periods (for mammals, birds and reptiles) or from when they became capable of independent feeding (for fish, amphibians and, the common octopuses). Primates, cats, dogs and horses had

title: Animal welfare in the United States
text: on World Animal Protection's 2014 Animal Protection Index based on its policies towards animals. In regards to legislative attitudes towards animal welfare, a legislator's political party is the biggest influencer on how they will vote on a proposed animal welfare bill. Legislators representing the democratic party usually are the most in favor of bills that support legislation that improves animal welfare. While states have anti-cruelty statutes in addition to federal laws, many animal farming practices are exempt. This table shows which states have enacted bans on various industrial farming practices considered to be inhumane. According to the USDA, the total

title: Animal Welfare Act of 1966
text: implement practices that minimize pain and stress to the animals. Another requirement made under this law was for each research facility to establish an Institutional Animal Care committee to oversee research proposals and provide oversight of animal experimentation. In 1990, The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 was amended by adding SEC. 2503, Protection of Pets (Pub.L. 101–624). This section established a holding period for cats and dogs of not less than 5 days at a holding facility of the dealer, so that the animal could be adopted or recovered by their original owner before it is sold.

title: Animal Welfare Act of 1966
text: license if they violate any provisions of the Animal Welfare Act and imprisonment of up to a year accompanied by a fine of $1,000. As of the 1985 AWA amendment, all facilities covered by the Animal Welfare Act have been required to establish a specialized committee that includes at least one person trained as a veterinarian and one not affiliated with the facility. Such committees regularly assess animal care, treatment, and practices during research, and are required to inspect all animal study areas at least once every 6 months. The committees are also required to ensure that alternatives to animal

title: Steve King
text: to protect animals, and perhaps ... laws to protect the environment, workers, or public safety." In May 2013, King introduced another amendment to the House Farm Bill, the Protect Interstate Commerce Act (PICA), saying, "PICA blocks states from requiring 'free range' eggs or 'free range' pork." In 2014, the controversial provision was dropped. On April 3, 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a state ban on same-sex marriage violated Iowa's constitution. King soon commented that the justices "should resign from their position" and the state legislature "must also enact marriage license residency requirements so that Iowa does not

title: New England Anti-Vivisection Society
text: applies chemicals such as pesticides, household products, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics to the eyes of rabbits. The resulting alternative was later used by a number of product and cosmetics companies. In 1983 NEAVS successfully lobbied to repeal Massachusetts’ 1957 pound seizure law, which required animal shelters to sell animals for use in research. This work resulted in the first and strongest anti-pound seizure law in the U.S. As of 2013, 18 states had banned pound seizure. In 1985, NEAVS began funding Bjorn Ekwall, PhD, chairman of the Cytotoxicology Laboratory (CTLU) in Sweden, a laboratory which designs and validates alternatives to animal

title: Animal Welfare Act of 1966
text: wrote in its opinion: To imply a cause of action in these plaintiffs might entail serious consequences. It might open the use of animals in biomedical research to the hazards and vicissitudes of courtroom litigation. It may draw judges into the supervision and regulation of laboratory research. It might unleash a spate of private lawsuits that would impede advances made by medical [sic] science in the alleviation of human suffering. To risk consequences of this magnitude in the absence of clear direction from the Congress would be ill-advised. In fact, we are persuaded that Congress intended that the independence of

title: Animal welfare in the United States
text: make up approximately 90% of research animals. Testing cosmetics on animals is currently legal in the US. The Humane Cosmetics Act to prohibit testing cosmetics on animals was re-introduced to Congress in 2015. The controversial practice of circus animal acts is legal in the US. In 2015 Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus announced it will phase out its use of elephants by 2018, but ended up shutting down in 2017. The keeping of cetaceans in captivity for entertainment is also legal. California has proposed legislation to ban the captive display of orcas, and the state of Washington has