Stopping Crush Videos
By Michael Markarian
One of this year’s most disappointing setbacks for animal welfare was the United States Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a key federal anti-cruelty law as unconstitutional.
The statute at issue is the Depiction of Animal Cruelty Act. Originally introduced by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.) and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1999, the act banned the interstate sale of videos showing illegal and often extreme acts of animal cruelty.
An investigation by The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) had previously uncovered an underground subculture of animal “crush” videos in which puppies, kittens and other small animals are stomped, smothered and pierced to death, often by women wearing high-heeled shoes — all for the titillation of viewers who are turned on by the blood and the killing.
In U.S. v. Stevens, the Supreme Court held that the law was “overbroad” and might capture some depictions of acts that are illegal but not “cruel” in the common usage of the term. At the same time, the court acknowledged the “long history” of animal protection laws in the United States and left open the question of whether a more targeted law aimed at “extreme animal cruelty” would be constitutional.
Often when laws are passed, it’s difficult to gauge their tangible impact on the ground. But here we had a law that succeeded in doing exactly what it was designed to do. In the late 1990s, there were at least 3,000 separately produced crush videos readily available in the marketplace for up to $300 apiece. But after Congress enacted the new law with overwhelming bipartisan support, these videos all but vanished.
A decade later, once the law was invalidated, we saw crush videos repopulate the Internet and the makers of these snuff films given a free pass to come back out of their dark corners. The HSUS recently conducted extensive Internet research and undercover email communication to ascertain the availability of small animal crush videos for sale on the Internet. The crushing videos were easily available for purchase and horrifying in the cruelty inflicted on the victims. The password protected part of one website had 118 videos for sale. The videos were of small animals, including rabbits, hamsters, mice, tortoises, quail, chickens, ducks, frogs, snakes and even cats, being tortured and crushed. The animals were burned, drowned, and had nails hammered into them. Videos ranged in price from $20 to $100. Each of the videos for sale contained footage of multiple animals, translating into hundreds of small animals being tortured and crushed to death for the profit of this one website alone. Undercover investigators also established contact with another crush website, which offered for sale 12 crush videos featuring rabbits. Another website contacted offered for sale 17 mouse crush videos. The Supreme Court decision, now, will further embolden the peddlers of this terrible cruelty to expand their commercial enterprises.
While the court’s majority was caught up in hypothetical scenarios, only Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. — whose Springer Spaniel, Zeus, is sometimes seen around the court — focused on the real world impact on animals. Justice Alito dissented, noting that the majority has struck down “a valuable statute that was enacted not to suppress speech, but to prevent horrific acts of animal cruelty — in particular, the creation and commercial exploitation of crush videos, a form of depraved entertainment that has no social value.” Justice Alito explained that “the animals used in crush videos are living creatures that experience excruciating pain. Our society has long banned such cruelty, which is illegal throughout the country.”
The court did provide a pathway for a more narrowly drafted law to be constitutional, and animal advocates in Congress are already pushing hard to advance that new policy. Rep. Gallegly, along with Reps. Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), introduced H.R. 5092 to end the intentional crushing, burning, drowning and impaling of puppies, kittens and other animals for the depraved purpose of peddling videos of such extreme acts of animal cruelty. The bill already has more than 100 bipartisan co-sponsors.
Congress should act swiftly to make sure the First Amendment is not used as a shield for those who commit barbaric acts of cruelty and peddle videos of their crimes on the Internet. We are going to fight hard to get Congress to move quickly on this new legislation, to stem the tide of crush videos and save animals from this sickening torment.
Michael Markarian is chief operating officer of The Humane Society of the United States, and president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund. He writes the blog “Animals & Politics” at www.michaelmarkarian.org.
