What’s been happening with efforts to ban horse slaughter since June 2008, when the United States Supreme Court refused to consider the appeal of Cavel International?

The Cavel appeal challenged the legal authority of Illinois to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption. Opponents of slaughter hailed the Supreme Court decision to do nothing as a victory, and in a very narrow sense it was. But the Supreme Court never addressed the merits of the Illinois law, nor did the Court reach a substantive conclusion one way or the other on horse slaughter. The non-action by the Court simply left intact a 2007 decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the Illinois Horse Meat Act that ended horse slaughterÑat least for human consumptionÑin Illinois.

The Seventh Circuit decision did not actually address the pros and cons of horse slaughter, either. Instead, the Court merely upheld the right of a state (Illinois) to regulate the slaughter of horses, without requiring a state to do so. The Seventh Circuit did not decide that horse slaughter was either prohibited or permitted in Illinois, or anywhere else. That decision, in the absence of federal legislation applicable across the board, still rests with the individual states.

A few states, including New York and New Jersey, have attempted to follow the lead of Illinois and ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption. There has been far more activity on the pro-slaughter side of the fence, however