Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-769.pdf
Page Number: 48.0

24 

UNITED STATES v. STEVENS 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Michigan 

ALITO, J., dissenting 
Appendix to opinion of ALITO, J. 

provisions of chapter 32 [Wildlife, Parks and 
Recreation] or chapter 47 [Livestock and Do-
mestic Animals] of the Kansas Statutes Anno-
tated”) 
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§525.130(2)(a), (e) (Lexis 
2008) (“Nothing in this section shall apply to the 
killing of animals . . . [p]ursuant to a license to
hunt, fish, or trap . . . [or] [f]or purposes relating 
to sporting activities”), §525.130(3) (“Activities 
of animals engaged in hunting, field trials, dog 
training other than training a dog to fight for 
pleasure or profit, and other activities author-
ized either by a hunting license or by the De-
partment of Fish and Wildlife shall not consti-
tute a violation of this section”) 
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §14:102.1(C)(1) (West Supp. 
2010) (“This Section shall not apply to . . . [t]he 
lawful hunting or trapping of wildlife as pro-
vided by law”) 
Me. Rev. Stat. Ann., Tit. 17, §1031(1)(G) (West 
Supp. 2009) (providing that hunting and trap-
ping an animal is not a form of prohibited 
animal cruelty if “permitted pursuant to” parts 
of state code regulating the shooting of large 
game, inland fisheries, and wildlife) 
Md. Crim. Law Code Ann. §10–603(3) (Lexis 
2002) (“Sections 10–601 through 10–608 of this 
subtitle do not apply to . . . an activity that may 
cause unavoidable physical pain to an animal, 
including . . . hunting, if the person performing 
the activity uses the most humane method 
reasonably available”) 
Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§750.50(11)(a), (b) 
(West Supp. 2009) (“This section does not pro-
hibit the lawful killing or other use of an ani-
mal, including . . . [f]ishing . . . [h]unting, [or]
trapping [as regulated by state law]”), 
§750.50b(9)(a), (b) (“This section does not pro-
hibit the lawful killing or other use of an ani-