Unfortunately, the State may have some leeway to enact this ordinance because a court would not likely find that there is a "fundamental right" to own a particular animal. Laws of this nature that don't interfere with a fundamental right typically are upheld if the legislature had some "rational basis" to enact the law. Even if the stated reason is merely pretextual. For example, health concerns or concerns for animal welfare. None of which actually come into play if some kid wants to keep a guinea pig in his bedroom, but the State has an interest in maintaining the public health and welfare...blah blah blah.



This is not to say that there are not ways to attack laws like this. Certainly, there are issues of privacy, property rights, etc... Also, there are numerous ways to attack the procedures employed in enacting the statute and its language, all of which are too complicated to get into on here.



My suggestion for the residents of Bluefield, is to buy whatever animal you want, shave some sort of political message into its fur, or arrange the animals artistically. Then you may claim some protection under the 1st Amendment...We don't want the good old boys in Bluefield interfering with anyones right to free speech.



(NOTE: Not an entirely serious argument; however, I might just be crazy enough to try this myself. If nothing else, it would put a spotlight on this retarded law and subject the Bluefield law makers to even more ridicule than they are probably accustomed)
-----
Information contained in this post is not intended as, and should not be taken as, legal advice. The use of the information provided in these pages should not be taken as establishing any contractual or other form of attorney-client relationship between the writer and the reader or user of this information.

[ Show Entire Thread ]