AVMA announces winners of Animal Law Writing Contest

Published on
information-circle This article is more than 3 years old

The AVMA has announced the winners of the inaugural Animal Law Writing Contest, a program designed to encourage law students to discuss and debate legal issues related to animals and animal law.

First place went to Christopher Moores of the University of California School of Law for “The Puppy Prohibition Period: The Constitutionality of Chicago’s War on Animal Mills,” in which Moores argues that a Chicago proposal to limit the retail sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits to animals obtained from shelters or similar operations is unconstitutional.  

Christopher Moores

Second place went to Kristina Rozan of the Maine School of Law for “The Unconstitutionality of the County of Los Angeles Mandatory Spaying and Neutering Law.” The ordinance requires almost all cats and dogs to be spayed or neutered after a certain age. 

Jointly sponsored by the AVMA, the American Kennel Club, The Cat Fanciers’ Association, and the Animal Health  Institute, the contest asked law students currently enrolled in a school accredited by the American Bar Association to write an original, in-depth constitutional analysis on the Chicago proposal or the Los Angeles County ordinance. The essays were evaluated by a panel of judges composed of lawyers and law professors not associated with the sponsors.

Moores received a $2,500 cash prize along with a paid trip to the upcoming AVMA Annual Convention in Boston, and  Rozan took home a $1,000 cash prize.

“I am honored to receive this recognition from the AVMA,” Moores said. “Animal law is an interesting and growing field, and I appreciated the opportunity to use my legal education to analyze a key issue in this area.”