Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-769.pdf
Page Number: 41

Cite as:  559 U. S. ____ (2010) 

17 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

constitutionality  of  §48  as  applied  to  depictions  of  brutal 
animal  fights.  (For  convenience,  I  will  focus  on  videos  of 
dogfights,  which  appear  to  be  the  most  common  type  of 
animal fight videos.)

First,  such  depictions,  like  crush  videos,  record  the
actual  commission  of  a  crime  involving  deadly  violence. 
Dogfights  are  illegal  in  every  State  and  the  District  of 
Columbia,  Brief  for  United  States  26–27,  and  n. 8  (citing 
statutes),  and  under  federal  law  constitute  a  felony  pun-
ishable  by  imprisonment  for  up  to  five  years,  7  U. S. C.
§2156 et seq. (2006 ed. and Supp. II), 18 U. S. C. §49 (2006
ed., Supp. II).

Second,  Congress  had  an  ample  basis  for  concluding
that  the  crimes  depicted  in  these  videos  cannot  be  effec-
tively controlled without targeting the videos.  Like crush 
videos  and  child  pornography,  dogfight  videos  are  very
often produced as part of a “low-profile, clandestine indus-
try,”  and  “the  need  to  market  the  resulting  products  re-
quires  a  visible  apparatus  of  distribution.”   Ferber,  458 
U. S.,  at  760.    In  such  circumstances,  Congress  had  rea-
sonable grounds for concluding that it would be “difficult,
if  not  impossible,  to  halt”  the  underlying  exploitation  of 
dogs  by  pursuing  only  those  who  stage  the  fights.   Id.,  at 
759–760;  see  533  F. 3d,  at  246  (Cowen,  J.,  dissenting) 
(citing  evidence  establishing  “the  existence  of  a  lucrative
market  for  depictions  of  animal  cruelty,”  including  videos
of dogfights, “which in turn provides a powerful incentive 
to individuals to create [such] videos”).

The commercial trade in videos of dogfights is “an inte-
gral  part  of  the  production  of  such  materials,”  Ferber, 
supra,  at  761. 
As  the  Humane  Society  explains,
“[v]ideotapes  memorializing  dogfights  are  integral  to  the
success of this criminal industry” for a variety of reasons.
Humane Society Brief 5.  For one thing, some dogfighting 
videos are made “solely for the purpose of selling the video 
(and not for a live audience).”  Id., at 9.  In addition, those