A judge in New York has ruled that two chimpanzees held in captivity can challenge their detention in court, effectively granting them human rights for the first time.
Chimps Hercules and Leo, who are being held in a laboratory at Stony Brook University, will be covered by a writ of habeas corpus, traditionally used to prevent people from being unlawfully imprisoned.
"This is a big step forward to getting what we are ultimately seeking: the right to bodily liberty for chimpanzees and other animals," Natalie Prosin, the executive director of the Nonhuman Rights Project told Science magazine.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Latest Videos FromThe Week
The group celebrated the ruling, saying the court had "implicitly determined" that the two chimpanzees are legal "persons". They had argued that chimps are among animals that are too cognitively and emotionally complex to be held in captivity and should be released into sanctuaries.
"Chimps are autonomous," said Stephen Wise, the animal rights lawyer who [2] first filed the case in 2013. "They self-determine their own lives; they are extraordinarily social, self-aware beings – behaviours and characteristics that qualify them as persons with a fundamental right to freedom."
Representatives from the university will now have to appear in court next month to explain the legal basis of the chimpanzees' detention and why it is not unlawful.
However, some legal experts have warned that the ruling may simply be a way for the court to gather more information at a further hearing. "The judges may merely have ordered a hearing simply as a vehicle for hearing out both parties in more depth," said law professor Richard Cupp.
But activists argue that this ground-breaking ruling will set an important precedent for future cases, regardless of the outcome. "We got our foot in the door. And no matter what happens, that door can never be completely shut again,” said Poisin.
