Pit Bull Sterilization Law Victorious
San Francisco, CA - On June 3rd, 2008 the San Francisco Office of the City Attorney released a statement regarding the CHAKO case -- a pit bull advocacy group that sued San Francisco over its mandatory pit bull sterilization law. CHAKO challenged the validity of the ordinance, alleging that it violated numerous federal and state constitutional provisions, including the right to happiness.
US District Judge Maxine M. Chesney granted the City's motion to dismiss all claims with the exception of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claim. Both parties have since settled the remaining claim, which resulted in dismissal of the lawsuit. Under the terms of the settlement, the City agreed not to enforce the sterilization ordinance against any person with a mobility-related disability who:
(i) owned an unsterilized pit bull service dog at the time the ordinance was enacted; (ii) uses that unsterilized pit bull service dog to accommodate his/her mobility-related disability; and (iii) had registered his/her unsterilized pit bull service dog with the San Francisco Department of Animal Care and Control by the time the ordinance was enacted. Any person who does not fall within this specific category remains subject to the ordinance.
City Attorney Dennis Herrera stated that although he continues to believe the ordinance is fully valid, the settlement is in San Francisco's best interest. "There is nothing about this ordinance that interferes with the ability of any disabled person to obtain assistance from service animals, and therefore it is fully consistent with the ADA," Herrera said.
CHAKO fits the bill of an egregious pit bull lobbying group. They stop at nothing when it comes to challenging the regulation of their breed, including misusing the rights of people with disabilities to prop up their goals. One can hardly stoop much further than this.
Related articles:
02/26/08: United States Supreme Court Leaves Intact Ohio Supreme Court’s Ruling that Breed-Specific Legislation is Constitutional
Service dog discrimination is real and a civil rights attrocity!
I have a Wolf hybrid-Rottie-Pit that serves as an emotional needs service dog helping me deal with my small manhood affliction. It pisses me off royally when the local daycare doesn’t welcome Kong with open arms. I spent alot of time sewing his official orange service dog vest!
San Francisco, wasn’t that the city where the pit bull service dog rescued by some bleeding heart shelter angel let her dog off leash and it attacked a police horse?
Yes, it was Golden Gate park. The dog wasn’t a service dog, I believe it was used as a therapy dog. The owner was an SPCA volunteer. There was a lot of gushing about how “wonderful” the pit was, how he passed temperament tests with flying colors.
The owner had him off leash at the park, when the mounted police officer told her to leash him. The dog took on look at the horse and lost it, attacking the horse. The owner made excuses for the dog…”he had never seen a horse before”.
When this first happened, I recall there was a lot of coverage…I recall one small article where someone claimed that the pit bull had previously been aggressive with another dog, so the potetial for animal aggression should have been known.
The SPCA rescue angels are completely delusional….they consistently prove that they cannot be trusted. The irony is, they don’t value all animal life as being worthy…..the lives of pit bulls are worth more to them, and they have no remorse when a pit harms another animal.