AMERICAN CANINE FOUNDATION
JUNE 9,2008
ACF tried in Ohio to stop BSL and we prevailed in the court of appeals, no other organization in history ever received a decision like ACF in the Ohio Court of Appeals. Then the case moved forward and the dog fancy refused to provide funding, we could not defend the case like we needed. We could of been heard in the US Supreme Court but no funding came in like we needed. Politics from the HSUS and corruption resulted in a pathetic decision from the Ohio Supreme Court.
In California ACF filed a lawsuit in federal court, we sued LA County and SF. Our lawyer brought up the fact that radical animal rights organizations supported the mandatory spay and neuter laws being challenged, the federal judge ignored those facts even after the district attorneys for San Francisco supported the radicals in his briefs.
The federal judge was turned into the FBI, this was made public and even made known to the federal judge.
The FBI we were told looked into it. Then the liberal federal judge dumped our lawsuit with the most pathetic frivolous decision ever to come down. In one of her arguments she said that the Freedom of Association Act was not violated because you could spay and neuter your dog so you were not forced to join an association. Funding dropped off from the Dog Fancy so we could not appeal.
In Colorado we are now in front of a federal judge who ignored the Tellings Ohio Supreme Court decision and ignored the federal case in California which has no pubilshed opinion, even though Aurora tried to cite it in early briefs they filed.
ACF is asking Dog Registries, National Breed Clubs and dog owners to support the Colorado Federal lawsuit.
Below is a letter from ACF's lawyer, we hope the Dog Fancy's wakes up because this is the last chance, its the only chance, there will never be another case where the city being sued failed to provide experts and evidence.
G Bui
AMERICAN CANINE FOUNDATION
23969 NE STATE RTE 3
SUITE G101
BELFAIR, WA. 98528
FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE AURORA COLORADO
June 6, 2008
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/16440132/detail.html?rss=den&psp=news
In late 2006, the American Canine Foundation and Plaintiff Florence Vianzon brought a civil constitutional challenge against Aurora Colorado to challenge the breed ban Aurora passed on American Pit Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Presas, American Bull Dogs, Dogo Argentinos, Tosas, Canary Dogs, Fila Brasileiros, Cane Corsos and the Presa Mallorquin. The Aurora city council appeared to be getting information from Denver re the ban.
The case made its way through Colorado Federal Court during 2007 and in the 'discovery' phase of the case, Aurora declined to disclose expert witnesses or exhibits, as apparently Aurora believed the case would not get to trial.
They likely assumed the case would dissmissed on the 'summary judgment' they filed asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit based on previous case law, involving constitututional challenges, such as the Colorado Dog Fanciers case (from 1989) and more recently, the politically influenced Tellings decision from the Ohio Supreme Court, which did no justice at all to dog owners.
The Colorado Federal Court Judge refused to accept such previous constitutional challenges standing alone, with no other required specific evidence, and found
" Unlike the above referenced cases, no evidence or facts have been presented
as to why the Aurora City council believed that the ordinance was necessary
to protect the safety of its residents."
" (The) defendant Aurora presented no evidence to support its argument
that the ordinance was rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose."
(Emphasis added)
To the best of our knowledge, there has never been a constitutional challenge filed over breed specific legislation where the opposing governmental side did not disclose experts, did not disclose any exhibits and also did not disclose rebuttal experts. Given the data, other information, and experts that Plaintiff American Canine Foundation disclosed for the Plaintiff's case, Aurora will ostensibly be at a disadvantage since they purposely did not try and offer any evidence on their own behalf.
ACF was successful in Ohio in the Tellings case when the Sixth District Court of Appeals ruled that breed specific legislation violates equal protection, substantive due process, and procedural due process, however because of political corruption from animal rights type organizations, the Ohio Supreme Court failed to rule on the evidence in the case, ignored documented evidence tampering and, except for one justice the court, supported breed specific legislation on the ground that certain breeds present a danger in urban areas?
The Federal Court in the current case re the Aurora, CO breed ban---gives us dog owners the best chance of prevailing over BSL in 20 years, because
(a) Laws are passed without a valid rational basis
(b) Cases from 20 years ago were not challenged sufficiently to overcome the standard of law required in a health and safety legal challenge
(c) Government/the public prefer to penalize innocent dog owners and innocent dogs by saying that the safety of the public is "protected" so they can seize innocent dogs, fine owners, and still ignore the actual dangerous dogs--which could be ANY breed of dog- AND---by not enforcing their own dog-related laws (such as leash laws.)
This is easily proven by watching countless SMALL dogs OFF LEASH everywhere, and by Animal control doing little or nothing about dogs that actually bite people. Coupled with the sensationalism of the media, even if there were only 5 dogs of any banned breed living in a city, those 5 dogs supposedly cause more danger than ALL the other dogs in the city combined. That is NOT a rational basis for anything, much less a purported law claiming "safety."
Carolyn Chan, Esq.
for American Canine Foundation
ACF needs your support to bring this case to trial, we need to raise $15.000.00 to help cover legal fee expense, experts, and trial preparation. We are asking for donations to be sent to:
ACF
23969 NE State Rte 3
Suite G101
Belfair, Wa. 98528
or pay pal (legislation2003@hotmail.com)
Anyone with questions can email ACF at legislation2006@hotmail.com
