The last year here has been a bit of everything: joyful and sorrowful, peaceful but chaotic, meaningful yet mundane. The juxtaposition is heightened by my circumstances, where I am simultaneously a homebound grandson and a multi-felony defendant. These worlds do not mesh easily, and the hardest part of the last year has been navigating the space between.

I moved home because I wanted to excel in the first of these worlds—the world where I fulfill my family’s expectations, where I serve them to my fullest capacity. I wanted to care for Nani, dutifully and wholeheartedly, as she has always cared for me. And I wanted to mend my relationship with Papa, as the conflict over my career path has distanced us in recent years. I turned down a fellowship at Denver Law’s animal law clinic, and I pursued an associate position at a big law firm like Papa’s always wanted. Ultimately, I passed the patent bar exam and lined up a firm job, but just a week before I was slated to start, my felony charges came down.

Enter our second world, that of factory farms, sacrifice, and struggle. My job offer is revoked, and, somehow, I muster the courage to explain things. “Papa, I won’t be able to start on Monday.” We were more hopeful at the time. That we might be able to negotiate a quick plea deal; send me back to work. But five months later and the charges still loom. In the meantime, my family has learned what it means to endure the carceral system. The uncertainty, the anxiety, and the cloud that it casts.

Papa feels like I’ve betrayed him. In a sense, I have. I’ve taken the world that he’s given me—the world with all its wealth and status and opportunity—and I’ve wagered it upon a cause of which he has no interest. Papa is often, and understandably, angry that I’ve done so. But in certain moments, he reveals the love that underlies it all.

“Please don’t make yourself a martyr. You are my only son.”

I am sobbing as I write these words. Sobbing for Papa and his fears; Mama, and the knots in her stomach. I see the toll my prosecution has taken on my parents, and I so desperately want to alleviate its burden. Truthfully, though, I’m not strong enough to do so. I am at the mercy of the State, and, try as I might, I cannot hold my family afloat, while I tread water myself.

These are the worlds I straddle between. One that calls me to serve our family; another that calls me to serve our humanity—to rectify this great violence our species has sowed.

For five months, I’ve failed to reconcile these worlds. With no means to merge them, I am learning to sit in the uneasy space between. I’ve pleaded “not guilty” to felony charges, while Nani eats breakfast outside my bedroom. I’ve conceded my fingerprints to police officers, while Papa observes from the courtroom gallery. This experience has been a great exercise in mental fortitude, and, while I wouldn’t wish the experience upon anyone else, I do feel myself growing stronger. I am learning to remain calm amidst the storm.

I intend to continue developing this strength, deploying its force on behalf of the vulnerable and voiceless creatures of this earth. Though their suffering and their salvation lie worlds apart, I will struggle tirelessly in the space between. I will gaze upon our nation’s slaughterhouses—their screams, their cries, their bloodstained floors—and I will accept responsibility for the devastation we have wrought. At the same time, I will dream—stubbornly, wholeheartedly—of a world where the blood turns to rain, and the floors are cleansed of stain. I will struggle to merge what is with what may be.

Along this journey, I will inevitably commit many mistakes. I will be messy, flawed, sometimes deflated. Still, so long as I am not alone, I have the utmost confidence in my ability—our ability—to persist. Together, we will chip away at this chasm between worlds. We will close the distance in our personal lives; we will merge with the compassion that is our higher selves—our true humanity.

What’s next!

• Later today, I’ll appear for my pretrial hearing, where, inshallah, my felony charges will be reduced to misdemeanors, as the government failed to prove felony grand theft’s $950 threshold.

• Our Phoenix animal rights group is starting to host weekly, Saturday hangouts at vegan restaurants (shoutout Alyssa for organizing)! This weekend, we’ll be at Strip Mall at 11:30am. Come through!

I’m rarely able to cultivate this presence, as I’m often preoccupied with stressors and anxieties. In the moments where I am truly present before another, though, I am in awe. I am struck by the beauty and depth of the person before me. The recognition that their world is just as complex as my own; the understanding that no one on planet earth is quite like them. I am then overwhelmed with gratitude, because what a gift it is to be present before this person. To seem them for everything they are, at least for this moment.

I’m not adequately describing the feeling. Presence before another is like realizing that every scribble is the Mona Lisa; every hum, the Moonlight Sonata. Presence is the thief of boredom, because no one is boring when you truly gaze upon their soul.

For me, eye contact and physical touch amplify this presence, which is probably why my deepest experiences are often with romantic partners. Presence, after all, is an intimate experience, and you can only gaze into your brother’s eyes for so long. Still, presence—presence as an expression of love—is something that can be shared in almost any context. It’s strange to be making this comparison, but beyond my romantic partners, perhaps the deepest presence I’ve felt is that of bearing witness to suffering. Suffering, even when observed behind the safety of a screen, feels so consuming. I am most moved by the imagery of animals in slaughterhouses, and when I fully surrender my presence to these poor souls, everything else melts away, and I feel as if I am left with nothing but the truth—the truth being the depth, the severity, the gravity, of their suffering. To share a fragment of their experience is to share my love.

I also want to discuss presence in the context of friendship. I believe the deepest forms of friendship require such presence. Because if you view someone as a means—a means to higher status, achieving a work-related goal, even exploring a hobby—then the relationship can only get so deep. True connection requires an understanding that the person before you is whole in their own right. That their life contains an infinite depth of complexity. That you are merely a side-character in the great drama that is their life story. I believe that it is upon this recognition that we are truly able to see and connect with others. Without this dissolution, our egos crowd the space between.

To cultivate these connections with the people in my life, I’ve found curiosity to be the strongest catalyst. This curiosity is, at its core, the yearning to know who is the person before me. In practice, curiosity primarily manifests as the act of listening. But it is also all the little things: follow-up questions to delve deeper, texting a week later to receive an update, and remembering the details, so as to call back upon them. Curiosity also requires a degree of inner, self-work, because attention is a finite resource, and insecurity directs inwards what might otherwise be directed outwards. There’s no simple solution to this problem of insecurity, but one simple trick I often use is breathing between spaces. Before I enter a house party, for example, I’ll bring my attention to my breath for just a minute. This centers me, allowing my attention, curiosity, and presence to flow outwards.

When it comes to political organizing, a genuine presence is extremely critical, as politics easily instrumentalizes people towards an external goal. Electoral politics, for example, is infamously transactional. But even when it comes to grassroots movements, it is not uncommon for new activists to feel burned by senior organizers. “You pretended to be my friend, just so I would help your cause!” These allegations often ring true.

Here, again, I believe the solution is a genuine presence. The organizer must recognize the intrinsic worth of every organizational member. They must take the time to pause and understand; to listen and to see. If conducted authentically, this presence will be felt and replicated throughout the community. It will carve deep and meaningful relationships, transforming what would otherwise be a transactional group of coworkers into a spiritual community of believers. In turn, this community will form the capacity to overcome great struggle—struggle that would have been insurmountable in isolation.

This is the vision I hold for the animal rights movement and the world. I dream of a beloved community of mutual listeners. A world where presence—the seeing of another’s soul—is abundantly, freely, joyfully exchanged. That’s love!

WHAT’S NEXT?

• On Monday, August 24th, at 1pm, I’ll be returning to my alma mater, Berkeley Law, to tell my story from law student to felony defendant. I’d love to see you there, and please message me if you’re interested!

• On August 25th, I have my pretrial hearing in Kings County. I’m not sure what to expect here, but at the very least my felony grand theft charge should be reduced to a misdemeanor, as this felony charge was unlawful from the start!

• Sometime in September (perhaps September 1st), I’ll be speaking at ASU Law! Come through and we might just gaze into each other’s souls, forming a beloved community with the capacity to free trillions of our fellow creatures from torment and suffering ahaa…

In many ways, my life is falling apart. I’m facing multiple felonies and over six years in prison. I’ve lost multiple job offers. And my family is stressed beyond belief. Mom legitimately pleads with me to do 100 pushups per day so I don’t get raped in prison.

A big part of what makes this all so stressful is the uncertainty. For example, Mom has little knowledge of the carceral system, so her anxiety fills the gaps. Unfortunately, those gaps become images of her son being violated inside a jail cell. Her stress then elevates my own, and I distance myself from her at a time when we should be together more than ever.

I want to be stronger for my family. To comfort Mom. To tell her her worst fears are remote possibilities. I sincerely believe these statements, but they only provide so much consolation with the power of the state looming over us. I can’t promise Mom that I won’t be confined to a jail cell before the year’s end. So long as that possibility remains, so will her anxiety.

These are the uncertainties plaguing my family and me. No one knows exactly how this unfolds, but a few things I do know for sure. No matter what happens, I will always have the love and support of my family. And no matter what happens, my friends will remain by my side. I’ll be sure to never lose these things, as they are my most precious treasures in the entire world.

These relationships keep me rooted in what is a period of great uncertainty. When the burden feels too heavy, Papa steps in to lighten the load. When my thoughts begin to spiral, Arun listens to me and lets them unravel. Dean, Abie, Saia, and Sahara—they show up for me, love in their eyes. I am beyond blessed to be in the company of such beautiful people. Their web of support is so tightly woven, I simply cannot fall through the cracks.

This experience has affirmed to me: relationships are the most grounding force on planet earth. So long as I have my people, even the steepest of climbs are surmountable.

Thank you to everyone in my corner. I am nothing without you; invincible alongside you.

On a grander scale, I am a deep believer that community is the antidote to our collective suffering. Cooperation is our species’ utmost superpower, and we must build the systems to channel its full capacity.

The stories of my Sikh lineage inform my philosophy here. As a religious minority, both at home and abroad, our people have endured hardship for centuries. In the 17th century, for example, India’s ruling power subjected Sikhs to relentless religious persecution, culminating in the execution of our Guru Tegh Bahadur. More recently, in 1984, India’s government facilitated the genocide of thousands of Sikhs. In each instance, our collective spirit persists because we remain unified in community and faith. We tend to each other’s wounds, and we sing Chardi Kala, our community’s resolve to remain cheerful in struggle.

To me, the greatest beauty of this community model is the unbreakable spirit it produces. Alone, one’s flicker of hope is inevitably extinguished. Together, however, we can keep the flame alive, sharing the communal embers when our personal supply runs short.

To overcome the behemoth that is the factory farm industry, I believe the animal rights movement must replicate aspects of this spiritual community. We need community centers to facilitate deep and multi-generational relationships, grand narratives to root us in a shared past and future, and a cohesive identity to unite us in struggle. Veganism is as close as the animal rights movement gets to this, but nowhere has veganism produced a unity comparable to that of the Sikh community. In my hometown of Phoenix, for example, we have three Sikh temples, but zero animal rights centers. These temples draw hundreds of people each week, while our grassroots animal rights group draws perhaps five. I dream of a world where animal activists congregate in a fashion and fervor rivaling that of organized religion. This might seem like a pipe dream, but I know this world to be possible because prior social movements have already accomplished the task. (See Quakers in the abolitionist movement; the black church in the civil rights movement; and ashrams in India’s independence movement).

I believe the animal rights movement to be uniquely fit for this spiritual community, as few journeys are as meaningful as our own. Our mission is to alleviate trillions of sentient beings from torment and suffering, unleashing human compassion on a scale that the world has never before seen. This is an epic story waiting to be told. We must see that it is written.

So, what does the future hold? On a personal level, I am admittedly uncertain. I may very well be convicted and incarcerated before the year’s end. Collectively, however, I have deep confidence that our movement—our species—will triumph over the great evil that is factory farming. The day will come where every slaughterhouse shutters its doors, and humanity will meet its fellow creatures, no longer with chains and knives, but soft hands and open arms.

WHAT’S NEXT!

• Potluck at Dolores Park on Saturday at 1pm! To my Bay Area brethren, come through to our potluck this Saturday. We’ll share good food, hangout with dogs, and discuss emerging political opportunities. Our Partiful already has 50+ RSVPs. I hope to see you all there!

• Community Event at the Phoenix Gurdwara on Saturday, August 1st! I still need to create an event page for this, but save the date! I’m trying to get 100+ members of our Sikh, Indian, and pro-animal communities to converge upon the Gurdwara I was raised in. We’ll discuss how my case fits into the history of religious resistance, and we’ll sit down for “langar,” the Sikh practice of communal eating.

• Enjoy today!

If you ask the government, my case is about whether I committed the elements of felony grand theft. In rescuing Phoebe the goat, did I steal the farm owner’s property? In taking her to a veterinarian, did I possess the intent to permanently deprive?

Although the government would certainly prefer to stick to these questions, my case is undeniably about much more. I wrote last time about how the government’s aggressive posturing reveals its true intentions. If my case was truly just about Phoebe—an emaciated, baby goat the farm owner estimated at just $150—then why am I facing multiple felonies and over six years in prison? Evidently, our government is serving a greater agenda: that of the factory farm industry and its corporate profits.

Beneath this corruption, however, lies an even deeper tension. A tension that goes beyond money and politics. A tension that strikes at the very core of who we are as a species.

You see, the factory farm industry has a particular view of humanity’s role on planet earth. Implicit in its operations is the assumption that we may use and abuse our fellow creatures as we so please. We may confine them to cages, if it saves on rent. We may manipulate their genetics, if it produces fattier flesh. And we may slaughter them along conveyors, if it expedites the process. This is a hollow, lifeless worldview. Alas, it is also the worldview underlying our nation’s food system.

In rescuing Phoebe, the industry felt this worldview directly challenged. Phoebe’s rescue constituted the tangible expression of animal rights, “Stop hurting animals. Let’s care for them instead.” This message cuts to the heart of the industry’s self-image, and that is precisely why the rescue has provoked such a disproportionate response. Whole Foods’ factory farm, of course, will not miss Phoebe among its nearly 10,000 goats. Its corporate executives, however, will feel the psychological sting of our moral challenge. If animals matter, then factory farming is no longer a respectable trade; it is the enactment of a great moral atrocity.

For the industry and its government operatives, their confession lies in the overreaction. It is not a secure person who lashes out at such slights. No, this behavior is the mark of a bully—a bully who understands, on some level, that what they are doing is wrong.

The history of American civil disobedience is teeming with similar examples of action and overreaction. The children of the civil rights movement provoked police dogs and firehoses, merely by marching through the streets. And the women of the suffrage movement provoked torture and imprisonment, merely by picketing the White House. In each instance, the pattern is the same: the establishment seeks to crush its opponents, thereby signaling the frailty of its position. One only seeks to silence the debate when it has already been lost.

Here, perhaps the strongest historical example is that of the Underground Railroad. At its height, historians estimate that the Railroad’s network of safe homes rescued about 30,000 people from the chains of slavery. For each of these 30,000, rescue was quite literally the difference between bondage and freedom. But for the slave industry, 30,000 was but a drop in the bucket. Slavery’s empire had amassed over four million slaves prior to the Civil War, approximately 100 times what the Underground Railroad was able to save. Still, the Railroad’s operations managed to trigger a fierce backlash, including the infamous Fugitive Slave Act, which required citizens from the North to assist in capturing slaves escaped from the South. This sparked additional controversy, ultimately culminating in the Civil War and the abolition of slavery within the United States.

Like many forms of civil disobedience, the Underground Railroad’s success is attributed not to its direct economic disruption, but rather its moral and cultural dimensions. Railroad “conductors” like Harriet Tubman—people who risked their lives to free the enslaved—communicated slavery’s moral gravity more than words ever could. Thus, the Railroad’s symbolic dimension was its most critical component in toppling slavery’s empire.

I aspire to live by the example of people like Harriet Tubman. And, in time, I pray that my small act of rescue will culminate in a similar manner. I envision a world where millions of people join the movement to abolish our nation’s factory farms, offering our minds, bodies, and souls to the creatures who suffer therein.

I promise to hold this vision in my heart. And I promise to hold out my hand to everyone willing to walk alongside. Together, we can rewrite the story of humanity and our earthly companions. Let us no longer be their abusers. Let us be their stewards instead.

What’s next!

• CAMPAIGN MEETINGS! I’m scheduling weekly campaign meetings on Mondays at 7pm. We’ll discuss updates in my case, and how you can help in the various realms of legal, communications, and community organizing. Message me or comment below if you’d like to join!

• PRESS COORDINATOR? I’m seeking a press coordinator who can help with outreach to news outlets and social media influencers. Message me if you have these skills!

• PHOENIX GURDWARA! I’m trying to organize a big community event at our Phoenix Gurdwara in late July, but I’m running into some roadblocks… let me know if you want to help organize!

“I need an exact amount for those goats. Make sure it’s a fucking felony.” That is what Sergeant Fausnett, the lead investigating officer in my case, ordered his Deputy on the day of my arrest. My alleged crime? Investigating animal cruelty at a Whole Foods factory farm, and rescuing a baby goat I found suffering.

Sergeant Fausnett’s statement is blatant evidence of government corruption. As lead investigating officer, Fausnett’s role is to gather evidence against me and recommend charges to the prosecutor. Earlier this month, he sat directly next to the prosecutor during my pre-trial hearing. Fausnett’s statement now reveals that he was intent on maximum punishment before even conducting his investigation. That is like a jury deciding guilt before seeing the evidence—a personal animus that infects every stage of my case. Hear Sergeant Fausnett’s statement for yourself.

Unfortunately, Sergeant Fausnett’s statement is but one example of the government’s vindictiveness. By the farm owner’s own admission, the goat I rescued was worth $150 at most.1 Putting aside the moral dimension of aiding a suffering animal, a theft of this value would typically result in a misdemeanor charge, if prosecuted at all. Instead, the government has charged me with multiple felonies, threatened me with over six years in prison, refused all offers to plea bargain, and asked the judge to put an ankle monitor on my leg. I’ve spoken to a half-dozen former prosecutors who have all confirmed: this is ridiculous. Evidently, my case is no ordinary case; it is a political prosecution.

Now, why exactly is the government out to get me? Ironically, it is precisely because my prosecution is not about me. I am merely a stand-in for the greater animal rights movement—a movement that the government is determined to crush. After all, our message poses an existential threat to one of America’s most powerful corporate interests: factory farming.

The factory farm industry’s capture of our government institutions is a longer story, albeit one that is uncomfortably familiar in our democracy today. It is a story of enormous amounts of election spending; an army of paid lobbyists; well-frequented revolving doors; and a carefully curated narrative that masks multibillion dollar corporations as small “family farms.” This corruption pervades every level of government, from federal to state to county. In Kings County, California, where I am prosecuted, the County Prosecutor Sarah Hacker explicitly ran an electoral campaign on the promise to “crack down on these agricultural thefts.” It so happens that these promises coincided with campaign donations from several industry actors, including thousands of dollars from the very Whole Foods factory farm I investigated.2

As my research continues to uncover these ties, I am legitimately fearful for what the future holds. I am certain that this is only the tip of the iceberg in a county frequently described as where “agriculture is king.”

At the same time, I remain rooted in hope. I know that many people understand the absurdity that is punishing someone for aiding a suffering animal. And I know that my story will continue to draw this absurdity into the limelight. For now, the government has chosen the wrong side of history once more. But, together, I am confident that we will flip this script. One day, officers like Sergeant Fausnett will answer to the cries of animals, not their abusers.

Want to help fight my case?

Truthfully, I am struggling to balance my felony charges alongside my job, family, and other life obligations. I need the world to hear this story, but I don’t currently possess the skills to share it. I am most in need of a video editor who can edit my scripts, a social media manager to help manage my profiles, and a graphic designer to create flyers. If you have these skills, please message me!

I’m also in the process of refining concrete ways for people to help. Please stay posted, and together we will make this backfire on the industry.

Enjoy today!

I’ve just exited my pre-trial hearing in Kings County, California, where I face multiple felony charges for rescuing a baby goat. I call my Papa to give him the update: the prosecution has refused my plea offers, and the judge has declined to reduce my felonies to misdemeanors. It looks like I’m going to trial on felony charges.

Our conversation spirals into an argument. Understandably, my Papa is disapproving of the risks I’ve taken, and he’s really worried about me. He wants me to work in big law so that I can make a comfortable salary and provide for a future family. Incarceration, disbarment, and felony convictions… those weren’t supposed to be in the cards.

He explains how my actions have harmed our family. “Your mother’s stomach is in knots. Maybe you can handle jail, but we can’t. Do you even think of us?”

I try to apologize, but he won’t hear it. He’s too angry—too hurt—to accept my apology right now. I get it.

We hang up, and I let myself unravel for a moment. Truly, I feel an immense guilt for the hardship I’ve brought on my family. I know I’m the one facing jail time, but, inevitably, my sacrifice is also theirs to bear. We are tethered by our love.

To make sense of my experience, I’ve been inspired to look to history. How did past reformers reconcile the risk-taking of advocacy with the safe-keeping of family?

Here, the story resonating with me most has been that of civil rights leader, John Lewis. By Lewis’s own account, he came from a family that preached, “Don’t get in trouble. Don’t get in the way.” That philosophy inevitably clashed with Lewis’s civil rights advocacy when, at the age of 20, he was first arrested for participating in Nashville’s lunch counter sit-ins. His mother responded by writing him a strongly worded letter and condemning his actions. “My mother felt it would bring shame and disgrace on the family name,” Lewis reflected. He wrote back to her that he was doing what he felt was right.

John Lewis went on to be arrested a whopping 39 more times over the course of the civil rights movement. In 2020, he died a civil rights icon, having served 30+ years in Congress.

Yesterday, my Papa told me that I should leave Arizona because I clearly don’t care for our family. My mom similarly accused me of caring about the animals more than I care about her. I tried explaining that it is one and the same—the love that binds me to our family is the same love that moves me for the animals. My message was lost somewhere in the space between.

I don’t blame my parents for making this about them. It is about them. When one of suffers, all of us suffer.

John Lewis’s story is comforting here, but it doesn’t provide much practical guidance. The only reason John Lewis’s story is so powerful is because he won. The shame once felt by his mother is eclipsed by the reverence now felt across America. John Lewis has been vindicated.

For my parents to feel similarly, I believe the animal rights movement must win as well. We must earn the same moral legitimacy that the civil rights movement commands today. I intend to do this in small ways at first, gathering the support of my friends, family members, and Sikh community. But, together, I am confident that we can scale these efforts far beyond our personal circles. Already, our nation is coming to recognize factory farming for the atrocity that it is. We must continue to escalate this moral pressure. With time, the industry will crumble under its strain, and our parents, our friends, and our communities will rally behind the truth that we have always known. Humanity is not meant to abuse our fellow creatures; we are meant to care for them.

“Counsel, is it true that 800,000 hens reside on this farm?”1

Justice Jackson of the California Court of Appeal began today’s oral argument with this very question. The case before her is People v. Hsiung—an appeal of Wayne Hsiung’s conviction for organizing the rescue of hens from an industrial egg farm. The central question considered by the court is whether the common law doctrine of “necessity” extends to animals in distress. The real kicker, however, is that our case concerns not just one animal in distress, but 800,000. Per industry standard, each hen was confined to a wired cage, never to see the sun.

For context, the necessity defense is an ancient legal doctrine that justifies otherwise illegal conduct if the conduct prevents a greater harm. For example, trespassing upon private property is usually a crime. However, if the purpose of trespassing is to rescue a child from a house fire, then the conduct is legally justified under the necessity defense.2

Here, the trial court denied Wayne Hsiung the necessity defense, even though his trespassing resulted in the rescue of tortured hens. In denying Wayne the necessity defense, the trial court reasoned that animals are categorically excluded from necessity’s purview. No matter how egregious an animal’s suffering, her interests are never a justification to trespass.

This legal reasoning is, of course, preposterous. Already, numerous bodies of law recognize exceptions for the great evil that is animal suffering. For example, the criminal law creates an “exigent circumstances” exception for animals in need, permitting law enforcement to enter private property without a search warrant.3 The law increasingly recognizes this need to differentiate animals from standard forms of property. And future generations will decry the trial court’s rationale alongside the other shameful decisions of our nation’s past.

Thankfully, our appellate justices resonated with these arguments, signaling a reluctance to adopt the trial court’s narrow reading of the necessity defense. Justice Burns, in particular, pressed our opposing counsel, “You’re asking us to create a bright-line rule that the necessity defense does not apply to animals. Why must we make that ruling? The common law evolves.”

At the same time, our justices indicated a reluctance to fully grant the necessity defense. Their first concern was the necessity defense’s “imminency” requirement—the requirement that the harm sought to be prevented is of an emergency status. “Doesn’t Mr. Hsiung’s months-long planning of the rescue undermine the imminency requirement?” asked Justice Simons.

Truthfully, Justice Simons’ question reveals a profound misunderstanding of California’s food system. At any given moment, millions of its factory-farmed victims are subject to imminent harm and suffering. They are confined to disease-ridden sheds, genetically altered to grow painfully large, castrated without painkillers, and suffocated to death in CO2 gas chambers. Their suffering represents not a child in a house fire, but a nation enveloped by an inferno. Their emergency is ongoing.

The justices’ second—and more fundamental—concern was opening the floodgates of change—or, as Supreme Court Justice William Brennan wrote nearly 40 years ago, the "fear of too much justice." Justice Burns expressly articulated this fear, anticipating how activists might use an appellate opinion extending necessity to farmed animals. “Wouldn’t activists go waving our opinion at future, factory farm rescues?” Yes. Yes we would.

Our attorney, Professor Justin Marceau, tried limiting the court’s floodgate concern by asserting that the necessity defense would be restricted to instances where animals are subject to criminal animal abuse. Justin’s reply, however, is flawed in the same manner as the justices’ discussion of the imminency requirement. As I write these words, millions of animals across California are subject to criminal animal abuse. That is the only logical conclusion of California’s anti-cruelty statute, California Penal Code 597, which creates criminal liability for anyone who “subjects an animal to needless suffering.” This needless suffering describes, quite literally, the entire apparatus of factory farming. Indeed, factory farming is the canonical example of needless suffering. It doesn’t improve our health; it doesn’t cure disease. It does, however, provide an abundance of cheap meat. Thus, profit and palliative pleasure are the industry’s strongest justifications for its torrential onslaught of the animal kingdom. These justifications are laughably weak.

So, as it turns out, the justices of the California Court of Appeal are faced with the same moral dilemma as us commonfolk. We want to be a merciful and compassionate people—people who oppose the abuse of power—people who protect the innocent and vulnerable. At the same time, we are afraid to truly abide by these principles, as true adherence requires the restructuring of our habits, economies, cultures, and identities. This is the great moral contradiction of our lifetimes. We love animals; we admire animals; we slaughter animals; we swallow animals.

This contradiction currently sits within the halls of justice. In their attempt to resolve it, I pray that our justices act with moral courage, like the Hawaii Supreme Court that first approved gay marriage, like the Warren Supreme Court that pronounced Brown v. Board. Regardless of their decision, however, I know the animal rights movement will prevail. Truth crushed to earth will rise again.

The plan itself is to rescue 2,000 dogs from what is truly a diabolical breeding and research facility: Ridglan Farms. A place where dogs are confined to wired cages, subjected to surgery without anesthesia, and sold to laboratories to be tormented. 2,000 courageous people have signed up to participate in this rescue effort and free the dogs from their abusers.

My participation in this action will be limited to my role as an attorney, but given my pending felony charges, there are real risks. If my California prosecutors get word of my involvement, perhaps they’ll be even more inclined to bring down the hammer. That’s scary, and it’s given me considerable pause as to whether I should participate in this rescue.

Ultimately, though, I've decided to move forward with the action. I want to share a bit about my decision-making process in accepting that risk, and I hope this helps people think through the risks in their own life.

Cost-Benefit Analysis.

First is the utilitarian calculation: the cost-benefit analysis. I provide tangible benefits to the rescue effort given my skills as an attorney (legal observing, negotiation skills, jail support). These benefits are offset by potential costs. My prosecutors might discover my involvement… that discovery might make them more punitive. This tradeoff isn’t so bad in my opinion.

Community.

Some of my best friends, Abie and Dean, are leading the charge into the facility. Also, the girl I love is flying out to provide jail support alongside me. My parents would definitely say these are illegitimate reasons to participate, but I don’t think so. These are some of my most treasured relationships, and I intend to nourish them for a lifetime. What better way to strengthen these bonds than by making history, together.

Time Travel.

The present is a gift, but it is also tunneling in its perspective. When I view my situation from the present, I mostly think of consequences and stressors (my family’s concerns, my job prospects, my felony charges). These are important things to consider, but they’re not everything. My perspective comes more into focus when I view the present moment through the lens of the future and the past.

Looking to the past, I understand that the risks I’ve accepted are the same risks carried by every moral frontliner. I recently read Moral Ambition, a book that describes the sacrifices made by America’s early abolitionists. These activists were ostracized, beaten, sometimes murdered. As just one example, William Lloyd Garrison (a white man), was nearly lynched by a white mob for promoting the abolition of slavery. I know the activists of every cause-worthy movement have suffered these same hardships, and I aspire to live by their example.

Looking to the future, I view things from both an individual and social lens. On an individual level, I have a hard time believing that death-bed Taj will regret his efforts to rescue tormented animals. And, on a social level, I know that humanity will one day vindicate our efforts. The ruthless exploitation of our fellow creatures is perhaps the greatest sin of our species. But humanity will rise from this shadow.

Meditation on Suffering.

Finally, it is my meditation on suffering that provides the deep, moral clarity underlying my action. I rarely reach this state of meditation, but when I do, it is wholly consuming. The best way to explain the feeling is as if my soul is shredding to pieces. That is what I feel when I truly contemplate the suffering of these creatures. My love for them is so deep; everything else fades to the background.

I so desperately want to capture this emotion and share it with the world. Nothing moves me more than their suffering.

Today, I was supposed to start as a second-year associate at a large law firm. Instead, I am a multi-felony defendant in a criminal case, facing over six years in prison. California prosecutors allege that I am guilty of “Grand Theft of Livestock” for rescuing an emaciated baby goat I found suffering on a nearly 10,000-animal factory farm.

These circumstances are difficult to accept, but also, they’re not so bad. My felony charges will likely resolve, and I can always find another job. Even in the worst case scenario, where I am convicted and incarcerated, I know I’ll be okay. Quite simply, that is because my relationships are too strong for me to ever truly fail. Dozens of friends and family members are ready to catch me if I fall.

That privilege also comes with a certain guilt, though, especially when it comes to family. I know they didn’t sign up for this. My Nana didn’t immigrate to America for me to risk jail-time; my mom didn’t raise me to become a felony defendant. Her question, “Why must you take such risks?” is still ringing in my ears.

I wish I could insulate her from the fallout, but I can’t. For me, that is easily the most regrettable part of all this.

Still, I can’t say that I regret my actions on the whole. My impulse to alleviate the suffering of others is, without a doubt, my best quality. I won’t allow anyone to take that from me. Whether it be an animal, a stranger, or a family member, I will always try to help. That is a promise.

Here, it is my impulse to help the billions of creatures suffering on America’s factory farms that has gotten me into trouble. I want to discuss the ramifications of that trouble-making in more detail, and, by doing so, I hope to answer my mother’s question.

SACRIFICE GENERATES DIALOGUE.

I’ve been an animal activist for six years. I’ve organized student groups, spearheaded pressure campaigns, and disrupted stadiums. Without a doubt, none of that advocacy has come close to generating the dialogue spawned by my arrest. On the days after that event, my communications were flooded by more than 100 friends reaching out to offer support. This included people who never previously engaged with my advocacy… people I hadn’t spoken to since high school. This trend remained in the months after, with dozens of people regularly asking for details.

I found this quite astounding. Somehow, the events of a single day generated more dialogue than my many years of advocacy… I suppose that is the power of sacrifice. As Dr. King once wrote, “It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.”

My personal experience is also consistent with the history of social movements. When arrests like mine are scaled-up into collective acts of sacrifice, they generate enormous amounts of dialogue. Dr. King’s Birmingham campaign, where 2,500 people accepted arrest, is perhaps the most iconic example of such collective sacrifice… but we need not look so far back in history. Just two years ago, I watched as 3,000 of my University peers accepted arrest in furtherance of a free Palestine, sacrificing their comforts to transform a niche, foreign policy issue into a national reckoning. We can—we will—do the same for animals.

SACRIFICE ENHANCES CREDIBILITY.

Sacrifice also greatly enhances credibility. I noticed this most vividly last year when I was invited to speak at Berkeley Law. While the first-years seemed somewhat uninterested during my introduction, by the time I got around to my third slide—the photo of my arrest—everyone in the room was suddenly alert. From there, I easily held everyone’s attention for the next 30 minutes.

Establishing this credibility is essential to make the bold claims that our movement requires. Factory farming is quite literally the most evil machine humanity has ever constructed. We can talk endlessly about this, but until we truly act like an atrocity is unfolding, the public has little reason to believe our sincerity. Sacrifice is thus the ultimate proof that we mean what we say.

SACRIFICE IS SPIRITUAL.

Finally, sacrifice serves a deep spiritual purpose. Although the consequences I’ve suffered are unpleasant, I know they serve a greater purpose. My sacrifice is for a just cause, honoring the nonviolent tradition of the many great leaders who came before me: Dr. King, Gandhi Ji, and Guru Tegh Bahadur of my Sikh faith. I will never be as great as these leaders, but I aspire to live by their example.

I hope to share this feeling with everyone who crosses my path. Together, we can join forces to overcome what is truly humanity’s greatest moral test: our treatment of earth’s most vulnerable. Do we choose to be their tormentors, or their stewards?1

At present, humanity is failing this test, with our food system abusing these creatures on an unfathomable scale. That is more tragic than I will ever have the words to describe. But I know there is hope. While our species is capable of exacting great evil, we are also capable of organizing its resistance. I have seen this with my own eyes—I personally know hundreds of people who’ve risked their freedoms for the animals. Their sacrifices are the living proof that compassion transcends the boundary of species. Together, we will unlock this capacity to its fullest extent, becoming the stewardly species we were always meant to be.

Today, I join 500 others in an effort to rescue dogs from Ridglan Farms, an industrial dog breeder in rural Wisconsin. We intend to walk right onto the facility, carrying the dogs out with our own arms. If we are ultimately successful, thousands of dogs will escape the confines of their cages, relocating to the loving homes they have always deserved.

For context, Ridglan Farms is one of the dog testing industry’s two remaining suppliers. Its business model is to breed thousands of beagle puppies, confine them to wire mesh cages, then sell them to laboratories to be experimented upon. One of the most common forms of these experiments is the infamous “drug inhalation” test, where researchers fasten gas masks to beagles’ faces, forcing them to inhale experimental drugs.

Ridglan Farms is guilty of a long list of such abuses, but rather than focus on the details of these horrors, I want to discuss something more fundamental: our relationship to these animals. You see, beagles are the dog testing industry’s preferred test subject—not due to any particular resemblance in anatomy—but rather due to their temperament: gentle, trusting, forgiving. In many ways, this renders the beagle the ideal test subject. Researchers may mutilate and operate upon the beagle, but he will never fight back.

This treatment is, of course, a profound betrayal of man’s best friend. Dogs have stood by humanity for millennia. They helped our ancestors to hunt; they protected our people from predators. Today, dogs continue this service by providing a constant companionship, reducing our anxieties, alleviating our loneliness. And yet. Our research institutions repay dogs’ loyalty—not with favor—but with torment. In this regard, humanity is the Brutus to the canine’s Caesar.

Even more tragic is the beagle’s acquiescence to our betrayal. Although humanity stabs him in the back, time after time, he still trusts our kind. Each time the white lab coat returns to his cage, the beagle hopes that the arms removing him will be loving ones. He refuses to use his claws. He refuses to use his teeth. He stays true to his promise, “I will never hurt you.”

In a cruel irony, the canine’s trust in humanity—an ancient partnership that once benefited his survival—has led to his demise.

The more I reflect on the dogs at Ridglan Farms, the more I have come to believe that our betrayal of the canine says something deeper about our relationship to the animal kingdom. Unfortunately, it is not just the dog that we have betrayed, but the entire domesticated creation: horses, cows, pigs, chickens. Through millennia of selective breeding, we have reprogrammed these animals’ instincts, transforming them from skittish creatures to trusting companions. Humanity has hardwired the trust of these creatures—a vulnerability that we now exploit on an unprecedented scale.

Take the cow, for example. Domesticated over 10,000 years ago, modern cows are descendants of the wild auroch—a fearsome creature once used in gladiator fights. Today, however, cows are some of the gentlest creatures in existence. Despite their enormous size, these 1,500 pound gentle giants are known to get the zoomies, rest their head on your shoulder, and cuddle.

Tragically, our agricultural industry exploits the cow’s tenderness much like the beagle’s. She is subjected to mass confinement and slaughter, with more than 300 million of her kind killed each year.

This degree of domination by the agricultural and research industries would be impossible without millennia of genetic selection. Aurochs would never line up for the slaughterhouse; wolves would never sit tight for drug inhalation experiments. It is humanity’s deliberate engineering of these species that has rendered them so trusting—and so vulnerable—to our mistreatment. That is betrayal.

As often, there is beauty in tragedy. While domestication has exacerbated our domination of the animal kingdom, it has also created the purest souls on planet earth. Creatures who refrain from violence, no matter how you hurt them; creatures who forgive you, no matter your sins.

I have met many of these animals in a personal capacity: dogs who survived China’s meat trade, cows who escaped America’s factory farms. Despite these creatures knowing nothing but violence from the human hand, somehow, they learn to forgive. They will still approach you, albeit with a certain cautiousness. They will still seek your touch, if only you are patient. Humanity has, in its reprogramming of the animal kingdom, inadvertently instilled these creatures with our greatest virtues.

This piece is my promise to live by those same virtues. I will not harm others, even if they harm me. I will not hold resentment, even if I suffer. And, above all, I will not lose my faith in humanity, even though we commit such sins. Like the beagles at Ridglan Farms, I will trust that our relationship can be mended. I know in my heart that we are not meant to harm our fellow creatures; we are meant to care for them.

I. MY FRIEND IS IN JAIL

Last week, my friend Zoe Rosenberg was incarcerated. She joins the nearly two million Americans confined to jails and prisons, and the one billion animals caged within our nation’s factory farms. The government will subject her to solitary confinement for 23 hours of the day, and it is already depriving her of the proper care to treat her Type I diabetes. The saving grace is that Zoe’s jail-stay will be short: less than a month.

Zoe’s case has attracted lots of attention because it’s not just about her; it’s about humanity. Her case asks of us… how should we relate to our fellow creatures? Is it okay for our food system to treat animals like objects? And, is it okay for our government to uphold this relational status? Punishing the people who care for animals, rather than the corporations that abuse them.

Judging from the public response, a growing number of people recognize the absurdity of Zoe’s prosecution. Her incarceration, in fact, has launched her from our ten-person student club to our nation’s largest newspapers: The New York Times, The Washington Post, and USA Today, to name a few. Similarly, her social media presence has amassed over 200k followers, drawing the eyeballs of hundreds of millions of viewers.

Watching my former, student club co-organizer become a national news story is somewhat surreal. I’ve always thought famous activists like Zoe were different. More courageous, more compassionate, more crazy. These were people I admired from afar… I didn’t think I could ever be like them.

Spending time around Zoe has made me rethink all that because, well, she’s actually pretty normal. Like most undergrads, she’s a bit socially awkward and gives off an ambient, anxious energy. She has an undying love for memes, which will occasionally consume her with fits of laughter that make you slightly uncomfortable. And she has an unruly obsession with Harry Potter (she once confessed to me, during a discussion on toxic vegan purity, that the only time she broke veganism was to try “butterbeer” at Harry Potter World).

As the president of our animal rights club at UC Berkeley, Zoe’s leadership was both powerful and slightly uninspiring. On the one hand, her persistence was the sole reason our pressure campaign was at all successful (the dining hall ultimately dropped a few factory farms from its supply chain). On the other hand, Zoe had minimal rizz, and she often struggled to connect with our fellow students. Club meetings rarely grew beyond ten people.

Seeing Zoe for her whole self—her goofy, persistent, meme-loving self—it’s given me insight into the young woman who habitually risks her freedom for the animals. Yes, Zoe is a very brave and effective activist… but she doesn’t have any superpowers. Above all, she is simply persistent. When Berkeley’s dining hall cast doubt upon our animal cruelty allegations, she conducted an investigation of its factory farm suppliers. When administrators refused to meet with us, she organized disruptions to force the issue. It is this persistence that has driven Zoe to national recognition. And it this persistence that has launched our fringe social issue into the mainstream once more.

II. THE WORLD IS OUR PLAYGROUND

Being around this relentless energy has completely expanded my conception of what’s possible. I come from a wealthy, risk-averse Asian family… like most of us, I was taught to stick to the path. I didn’t realize I could disrupt the path. I certainly didn’t realize I could carve a new path altogether.

By bringing me along for the ride, Zoe has taught me a lesson in my own power. Need proof of animal cruelty? Walk onto the farm and take photos. Need to speak with an avoidant decision-maker? Disrupt the dining hall until they agree to negotiate. We don’t have to stick to emails and petitions and Instagram stories. We can literally just do things.

To solidify this concept, I’ve been thinking about the metaphor of a playground. On a playground, the possibilities are limitless. We can build fortresses, traverse lava landscapes, travel to far-off lands. The expectations of adulthood often stamp us of this creativity, but if we are able to hold onto our imaginative selves, the world is wholly transformed. Rather than a maze scattered with red tape, the landscape becomes an exciting and colorful playground—one that we can mold with our own hands.

I feel so grateful to have been around people like Zoe who’ve helped me form this playground perspective, and I hope to share it with everyone who crosses my path. Together, I know that we are capable of such wonderful things (more on what that means for us here in Arizona, coming sometime next year).

For now, my unsolicited advice to everyone reading this blog is SURROUND YOURSELF WITH BELIEVERS! It is a tragedy that our generation is plagued with such fear and pessimism… that energy can really suck the life out of you. (The number of uninspiring, miserable-ass hoes who’ve told me the world will never change is actually embarrassing.) WE DON’T NEED THAT ENERGY! The world is complete with examples of well-meaning people who’ve joined forces to agitate and change-make. We are no different.

And so, while Zoe remains trapped in a cage, she has inspired me to think beyond the mental confines of my own. I hope that she does the same for you, too. Enjoy today.

INTRODUCTION

Veganism has weathered its fair share of hit pieces this year. The Atlantic reported that “plant-based eating has lost its appeal”; the Financial Times declared “the vegans lost”; and even the environmentally-conscious The Guardian acknowledged that “vegan burgers are losing the US culture war.”

Unfortunately, the hit pieces are right… veganism is failing. Despite the proliferation of vegan-options, vegan-ism has never cracked more than 3 % of the U.S. population. On a per person basis, Americans are eating more animals than ever before.

This really sucks for the animals who are being eaten, but there is a silver lining. While the hit pieces are correct in assessing veganism, they fail to see that its underlying belief system—animal rights—is more popular than at any time in American history.

I know that may sound counterintuitive. “If animal rights is so popular,” you might ask, “then why is everyone still eating meat?” In short, these split trajectories are possible because buying is not believing.

Allow me to explain…

I. BUYING IS NOT BELIEVING

Consider your last trip to the grocery store. Did you calculate the carbon emissions of your milk carton? Did you make sure your bananas were ethically sourced? Did you research your eggs’ animal welfare standards?

If you’re like most consumers, the answer is a resounding NO! Our food choices, and our consumer choices more broadly, are rarely a function of carefully reasoned, moral preferences. Rather, they are a reflection of simpler concerns such as, “Hmm… I could really go for some beef jerky right now.” Or, perhaps, “Soy beans are gay.” In other words, immediate concerns such as taste, price, convenience, and culture do far more to determine our food choices than far-off concerns like morality.1 Thus, it would be a mistake to infer that meat-eaters never support animal rights. To the contrary, the omnivore’s purchase of boneless chicken breasts has far more to do with his circumstances than his moral preferences. Indeed, buying is not believing. Purchasing chicken is no more an endorsement of animal cruelty than purchasing Nike’s is an endorsement of sweatshops.

II. ANIMALS ARE UP

Once we acknowledge this disconnect between buying and believing, it is easier to see how veganism (a consumer boycott) might diverge from animal rights (a moral worldview). Indeed, this divergence describes our world today—a world where animal rights is measurably rising in popularity. Below, I share evidence from three key domains—political ballot initiatives, public opinion polling, and elite endorsement of animal rights—to show that this is so.

(A) Political Ballot Initiatives.

Political ballot initiatives are a great way to observe the buying-believing gap. By transforming what is typically an individual, consumer decision (“Should I buy cage-free eggs?”) into a collective, moral decision (“Should we ban caged eggs?”), ballot initiatives expose the gap between consumer behaviors and moral beliefs. Through two decades of these pro-animal ballot initiatives, it is clear that people are sometimes willing to collectively ban the products they individually buy.

Take California’s Proposition 12, for example. Perhaps the strongest animal welfare law of this century, Prop 12 banned the caged confinement of egg-laying hens, passing with a strong, 62 % majority. Now, take a guess… prior to California’s vote on Prop 12, did a corresponding 62 % of consumers actually buy cage-free eggs? NO! In fact, cage-free eggs only made up about 14 % of California’s egg market. That means roughly 48 % of consumers approved the ban of a product they once bought!

Similar stories can be told of pro-animal initiatives in Arizona, Florida, and Massachusetts. In fact, state bans on the intensive confinement of farmed animals are now an undefeated, 5-0 when presented to voters at the ballot box. These successes reveal a much larger base than the ~5 % vegetarian population, and they provide a launching pad for more ambitious reforms in the future.2

(B) Public Opinion Polling.

We don’t have a lot of polling to measure the public’s support of animal rights over time. But, conveniently, Gallup has been asking one, animal rights-related question for 25 years! In its survey on “Acceptance of Moral and Values Behaviors” Gallup asks a bunch of questions about polarized moral issues like abortion, assisted suicide, and, yes, animal testing.

The question pertaining to animal testing asks, straightforwardly, whether medical testing on animals is “morally acceptable or morally wrong.” In 2001, 65 % of Americans said animal testing was morally acceptable. But by 2025, that number has steadily dropped to 47 %.

Admittedly, this is just one poll, and it pertains to animals in research, not food. (Unfortunately, we don’t have this kind of polling in the food context.)3 Still, the poll demonstrates that it is possible to increasingly devour animals in one context WHILE increasingly respecting them in another.

(C) Elite Endorsement.

Onto the last category of evidence: elite endorsement. When we look to the “elite” sectors of society—public intellectuals, academia, politics—it is clear that the moral validity of animal rights (or, at least, the moral atrocity of factory farming) is increasingly recognized.

Here are a few prominent intellectuals who have endorsed animal rights (or condemned factory farming). For philosopher kings and queens we have Peter Singer, Richard Dawkins, Martha Nussbaum, and Yuval Noah Harari. For lefty intellectuals we have Angela Davis, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Ezra Klein, and Jane Goodall. And, for prominent conservatives, we have RFK Jr., Vivek Ramaswamy, and Mr. Joe Rogan himself. Basically, anyone who seriously thinks about factory farming comes to the conclusion that it is very, very wrong.

This increased recognition is also found within academic institutions. For example, in the legal field, animal law was only offered at nine law schools in the year 2000. Today, however, it has expanded to over 150 law schools, including 13 of the 14 top-ranked law schools. Similarly, philosophy departments have seen an explosion in animal ethics courses since the 1980s.

Finally, within the realm of state politics, there has been a significant increase in the number of farmed animal welfare laws. In the year 2000, zero such laws existed. But today, there are 44 of these laws across 18 states.4

III. MY PREDICTION: THE SPROUTS WILL SURFACE

Dr. King once compared injustice to a boil. Like a boil, injustice will persist so long as it remains covered. It is only when injustice is exposed “with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light” that it can be cured.

I’m not sure this analogy is medically accurate, so let’s imagine some vegan sprouts instead. Like a sprout, the animal rights movement slowly germinates beneath the surface, extending its roots, yet remaining invisible to observers. It is only when the sprout breaks the surface that its full force is suddenly unleashed, visible to the world.

The sprout represents our world today. While our movement’s progress is obscured by carnivorous, consumer patterns, its roots continue to unravel across the moral landscape. Soon enough, these roots will break the surface of complacency and cognitive dissonance, and animal agriculture will fall alongside it. Institutionalized animal abuse is simply untenable in a world that increasingly recognizes its evil.

Like other social issues, our ultimate policy victories—factory farm bans, slaughterhouse phase-outs, legal rights for animals—will lag behind the shift in public opinion. Specifically, I predict that the trajectory will look something like this:5

The million-dollar question is, of course, where are we on the timeline? This is, candidly, just a vibes-check at this point, but I’ve marked on the graph where I believe we are at this point in time—a position where animal rights is gradually rising in prominence, one to two decades prior to the explosion of our social movement.

If I’m wrong, well, there’s only trillions of animals, and an unfathomable scale of suffering on the line. So, let’s make sure it comes true, I guess!

That is the question that the State Bar of Arizona is currently considering. I just got out of my hearing on the exact topic, in fact.

For context, the Arizona Bar just conducted an “Informal Inquiry” to determine whether I possess the moral character required to practice law. My requisite character traits, such as honesty, reliability, and respect for the law, were called into question because of my arrest from a few months back. Of course, that arrest wasn’t just any old arrest; it was an arrest for rescuing a suffering animal. That didn’t exactly exonerate me, though.

The members of my panel definitely grilled me. Their greatest concern was regarding my respect for the law, and they asked me a bunch of questions along the lines of, “How can you reassure us that you won’t keep trespassing onto farms?”

That was a hard question for me to answer because the honest response is, “I can’t.” Part of me definitely wanted to give them the answer they wanted to hear… that I regret my past actions… that I promise to confine my advocacy to well-established legal pathways. But that answer wouldn’t sit right with me. While I don’t have any concrete plans to enter a factory farm, there is certainly a chance that, one day, I will. So long as there are animals suffering on these facilities, I will try to help them. Sometimes that may mean walking onto the facility, and carrying them out with my own arms.

And so that’s what I told my panel. “If you want my assurances that I’ll never enter a farm or slaughterhouse ever again, I can’t give that to you today.” Perhaps I misread my panel, but they seemed to respect my conviction. I suppose whether they’ll permit me to practice law is another question.

This experience has definitely made me think a lot about what my life would look like if denied entry to the profession. In many ways, it would suck. I would surely feel the sting of being deemed “unfit for practice.” Much of my family and greater community would be disappointed in me. And I wouldn’t get to practice my chosen profession in my home state.

At the same time, though, I know I’ll be okay. My family is well off; I have multiple degrees; and, most importantly, I have lots of wonderful friends in my life, many of whom wrote statements in support of my moral character (from the bottom of my heart, thank you if that was you). With you all beside me, there is nothing I can’t do (except, perhaps, practice law in Arizona).

And so, if the State Bar excludes me from the legal profession, then I am willing to accept that. At least it will be for something I believe in. And, hopefully, my sacrifice will make a small difference for the animals who suffer far greater.

Update: I have not yet made any honorable sacrifices, as I have recently learned that I passed the moral character application!!!

My grandmother officially changed their relationship status sometime in the last year. My mom thinks it’s because my uncle died. The pain of losing a son was too much, so my grandmother convinced herself that her son was her brother instead. Naturally, that would make her husband her dad.

That’s some pretty advanced family calculus for a woman with late-stage Alzheimer’s, but I suppose it’s possible. Whatever the underlying reason, it definitely bothers my grandfather. He sometimes calls her “Mama” in retaliation, but it only makes her laugh.

She laughs a lot, actually, which is good. Well, with me at least. Allegedly, I am the favorite grandson, and that is why, in favorite grandson-fashion, I moved into their home last month. I just love them so much. Whenever I thought about staying another year in Oakland, I would also think about my grandmother unraveling another year in Phoenix. I couldn’t stomach the thought of that. I wanted to have more moments with her.

And moments we have had! They tend to all blend together, since we’re always doing the same thing. Sitting on the couch. Eating at the table. That’s what I’m here for, though. Boredom is a gift when it’s beside her.

We are more than just boredom, however! Just an hour ago, in fact, we had a really funny moment together. I was sitting beside her in the bedroom, eating ice cream and watching TV. As she scooped a spoonful into her mouth, she looked over me and said, very matter of factly, “We are the lucky ones.”

“I AGREE, NANI!” I shouted back (she’s hard of hearing). At the time, I assumed she was referring to our ice cream, but on further reflection, I realize she was touching on the beauty of mundanity. The indescribable comfort of sitting beside your loved ones, doing nothing at all. We are the lucky ones, indeed!

I’ve officially done it. My animal terrorism has gone too far, and now multiple law enforcement agencies are discussing the infamous “Taj Uppal DXE goat theft.” Indeed, in one of the most notorious heists of 2025, I rescued a baby goat.

Recently, I woke up to the above email from a Sonoma County prosecutor to a Kings County investigator. (Sonoma County is where I am litigating a criminal case. Kings County is where I rescued the goat.) The Sonoma County prosecutor asks “Have you guys made a filing decision yet?” referring to whether Kings County has decided to charge me with any crimes.

My first reaction to seeing this email: fear. It’s been months since I was arrested, and I was under the impression that I’d escaped unscathed. This email was a spooky reminder that the statute of limitations extends beyond my imagination. If Kings County charges me with burglary, they could theoretically wait until May of 2028 to haul me into court. That’s scary!1

My second reaction to this email: laughter. It’s honestly absurd that rescuing animals causes such a stir from law enforcement. I suppose that speaks to its power!

Let’s keep caring for animals. That’s who we’re meant to be.

I believe in us. In every sense of the words. I believe that we’ll end poverty. I believe that we’ll stop killing animals. I believe that we’ll solve climate change and global conflicts… that we’ll end racism and mass incarceration. Name the social issue. I believe!

I know for some people, this level of optimism sounds naive. And I get that. I also have my days when the world feels like it’s falling apart. For example, right now, the newsfeed presented by my Instagram includes (1) children starving to death in Gaza, (2) animals being tortured on farms, and (3) Democrats and Republicans threatening each other with mutually-assured-gerrymandering. A rosy picture indeed!

Still, what helps me through this doom & gloom is to ZOOM OUT… to take a step back from the day-to-day catastrophe supplied by my algorithm… and to remember my old friend: the grand arc of history. Let’s take a stroll along its path, shall we? I think you’ll find, as I have, that things have actually improved quite considerably.

POVERTY.

The reduction of global poverty is perhaps the greatest moral victory of the last century. In 1820, a whopping 75 % of the world’s population lived in “extreme poverty,” defined as living on less than $2 per day. Today, that number has shrunk to 10 %, AND THAT IS INCREDIBLE.1 Hundreds of millions of mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters no longer have to suffer the pain of hunger. Instead, they have risen from this state of suffering and obtained the comforts of modern living—the running water, electricity, and plentiful food that we all enjoy today.

LIFE EXPECTANCY & CHILD MORTALITY.

In 1800, the average life expectancy was about 30 years. That means I would be expected to die IN THREE YEARS! Today, fortunately, life expectancy has more than doubled to 73 years. Better yet, this doubling of life expectancy is found in every world region. Not just Europe and America, but Asia and Africa, too.

Increased life expectancy is the result of many factors: improved sanitation, healthcare, nutrition. Perhaps the most important factor, however, is the reduction in child mortality. In 1800, the average mother watched two of her children die before reaching the age of 5. Today, far fewer mothers suffer this heart-wrenching experience, as the global rate of child mortality has shrunk from 40 % to 4 %.

EDUCATION & LITERACY.

In 1820, only about 1 in 10 people of people knew how to read. Today, that number has risen to nearly 9 in 10 people. The spillover benefits of this increased literacy must be immeasurable.

WAR & VIOLENCE.

Violence is a bit trickier to measure, and I had a harder time discerning a clear pattern here. Still, the overall trend appears downwards.

What causes problems for this trendline is the measure of people who have died in warfare. Since World War II—the deadliest war in human history—the number of war-based deaths has fluctuated quite a bit. Most recently, 2022 experienced a major uptick in war-based deaths, mostly due to the conflicts in Ukraine and Ethiopia. Not the best news here.

If we examine interpersonal violence instead of state-based violence, however, we find that the murder rate has declined drastically since the Middle Ages. For example, in the year 1300, England suffered about 20 murders per 100,000 people. Today, that number has plummeted to around 1.5 murders per 100,000. Other European countries have experienced similar reductions. (Only European data dates back far enough for us to examine these trends.)

Finally, one last graph here to capture violent crime in the United States, specifically. Despite all the talk of lawlessness and liberal cities, violent crime in America (which includes theft) has plunged since the 1990s. Pretty incredible!

DEMOCRACY.

Democracy is a new invention. Two centuries ago, every human on planet earth was deprived of their civil liberties. Today, however, billions of people enjoy the right to self-govern.

HUMAN RIGHTS.

Okay, last example here, because I couldn’t finish without mentioning the fact that WE NO LONGER HAVE SLAVERY. Holy shit man. I really think about that sometimes and it gives me so much hope for the future. Our society has transformed so much in the last hundred-or-so years (and I don’t think I need any graphs for this one). Black people used to be property and sold in auctions. Women used to be confined to the home. Gay people used to all be closeted. Obviously, we still have lots of work to do along these frontiers. But, man, we have come a long way. Animals are next.

CONCLUSION: HOPE IS AN EXPERIENCE. NOT A TRENDLINE.

Hopefully you found this walk along Grand-Arc-Of-History lane somewhat persuasive. Whether it be poverty, health, education, or human rights, our species has taken an enormous leap forward in the last two centuries. Despite our many outstanding issues, I expect this progress to continue. Indeed, I believe in us.

Still, I imagine that many of my disillusioned brothers and sisters remain unconvinced by this argument. And I say this from experience. I’ve had many conversations where I try to persuade friends that there is yet hope in this world… but nothing really seems to get through to them. I mention the end of slavery. They mention systemic racism.2 I mention the decline of poverty. They mention climate change, pandemics, and the impending AI apocalypse.

Why this stubborn attachment to the belief that everything is doomed? My working theory is that, like many beliefs, hope is not subject to logical argumentation. Rather, hope is a reflection of our day-to-day experiences—experiences that are shaped by the world around us. Have you been wronged by the government? Betrayed by a friend? Does your media consumption emphasize the worst in humanity? Do you lack a sense of community? Under these sorts of conditions, it’s no wonder that so many Americans feel hopeless. To reinvigorate hope, we need to reconnect with one another. We need to feel safe… taken care of.

I’m pretty sure that’s the real reason why I’m as hopeful as I am. The HiStOriCaL TrEnDliNes are cool and all… but nothing will ever compare to the love I receive from my friends and family. I am beyond blessed to spend almost every day in their company. Because of them, I am rarely ever lonely. They make me laugh; they listen to my struggles; they hold me together.

So, ultimately, I’m just as stubborn as the disillusioned. Even if you took the graphs above, inverted them, and somehow proved that human progress is nothing but a mere illusion… well… I would still believe in us.

This is the closest I get to having faith. Because to tell me that humanity is doomed is to invalidate everything that I have experienced. The people in my life are kind, trustworthy, and collaborative. If that is true for the small microcosm that is my life, then we can make it true for everyone else too. And we will.

Wayne Hansen Hsiung is many things. Former law professor… convicted felon… my boss at work… and my… my client? Yes, Wayne Hsiung is my first official client as a practicing attorney.

This relationship… while strange at first glance… is actually quite reasonable upon closer inspection. Just kidding! It’s actually quite strange no matter how you look at it. That said, it’s still one of the best things to ever happen to me.

You see… later today, Wayne goes to his “restitution” hearing, where two factory farms seek a total of $581,701 from him. That’s over half a million dollars! (Side note: Wayne does NOT have half a million dollars. He’s broke.) I’ll be representing him as his attorney (which is still crazy to say), and I’ll be making the argument that, actually, he doesn’t owe the farms any money. (I’ll also be co-counseling with my other boy, Steffen, who is leading the charge.)

Quick context: Wayne was convicted of trespass for two “mass open rescues” he attended back in 2018 and 2019. To give you an idea of what these events looked like, the gist of the 2018 rescue is that the farm—Sunrise egg farm—was abusing its animals… Wayne told the authorities but they didn’t do anything about it… so Wayne organized some friends (500 of them in fact) to go rescue the animals themselves. He got charged with a few felonies for doing that, and was ultimately convicted of felony conspiracy to trespass back in 2023. Now, the farms are allowed to recover “restitution” for the economic harm they’ve suffered as a result of Wayne’s crime.

OKAY, but here’s the really crazy part. The farms aren’t seeking restitution for any property damage that Wayne caused (after all, the mass rescues were nonviolent). Instead, the farms are seeking restitution, primarily, for building NEW FENCES around the perimeter of their properties. The tab for those fences comes out to around $400,000, and now the farms want Wayne to pay up.

This is super suspect from a legal perspective, because (1) Wayne was convicted of trespass… TRESPASS… and in what world does trespass land you with $400,000 in damages? And (2) California’s restitution statute—Section 1202.4(f)(3)(J)—to be precise, suggests that restitution for security systems (such as fences) is limited to the residential context (A.K.A. privates homes). Never before have the courts extended criminal restitution to a security system for a commercial business for a nonviolent offense. (If you’re interested in learning more of the nitty gritty legal arguments, take a look at our court filing.)

THAT’S NOT EVEN THE CRAZIEST PART, though. The prosecution in this case is legitimately demanding that Wayne pay for the public relations consulting that Sunrise Farms signed up for “to address the bad press and damage to their reputation that resulted from the defendant's actions.”1 That tab comes out to over $150,000!

It’s difficult to understate how insane this is, and I can’t keep using caps lock because I’ve already been spamming it. No, but seriously, get this… Wayne exposed Sunrise for abusing its animals… Sunrise then suffered reputational damage for… well… abusing its animals… so then Sunrise paid a PR expert to clean up the mess… and now Sunrise wants Wayne to pay for it??

Baffling, truly.

But this is unfortunately the state of the world that we live in. The institution of mass abuse that we call animal agriculture is so entrenched that our other institutions… such as the police, the prosecution, and the courts… will actually go out of their way to punish anyone who dares stand up against it. Wayne is suffering the consequences. But not if I can stop it!

I’ll update you all here later. Enjoy today.

UPDATE: We didn’t finish the hearing on time yesterday, so we’re running it back later next month. From my read, it looks like the judge is poised to grant most of the farms’ restitution, but we’ll see… come through to Sonoma County courthouse (600 Administration Drive, Santa Rosa) on August 25th at 1:30pm if you’re trying to see me examine Mr. Hsiung… should be fun!

Yesterday, your friendly, neighborhood, Zohran “Mr. Cardamom” Mamdani was elected the Democratic nominee for the Mayor of New York City, upsetting the Democratic establishment, and inspiring millions of young people around the nation. I haven’t felt this way about electoral politics since... ever. The closest was probably #FeelTheBern, but truthfully there are limits to what an 80-year-old white man can make me feel.

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. Zohran entered the mayoral race with just ONE-PERCENT name recognition… by his own words, a “no-name” candidate. Meanwhile, his primary opponent, former New York governor Andrew Cuomo, commanded a stronghold over the Democratic establishment, out-fundraising Zohran by $25 million dollars. Unsurprisingly, nearly every poll predicted Cuomo winning up until the final few days of the election.

AND YET. Last night Zohran Mamdani won so decidedly that Cuomo’s bum ass was forced to concede on the night of the election.1 Now, Zohran is the clear favorite in NYC’s upcoming general mayoral election, where he faces off against the Republican mayoral nominee Curtis Sliwa (who faces long odds in the deeply blue NYC), current NYC mayor Eric Adams (who sports a measly 20 % approval rating), and possibly Andrew Cuomo (who literally just took the fattest L).

So, how exactly did Mr. Cardamom and his campaign manage this upset? I don’t have the greatest insight into Zohran’s campaign, but sitting from my not-so-arm-ish chair in Oakland, California, here are the three things that jump out to me most:

1. The ~Vibes~

Immaculate is an understatement. Zohran Mamdani and his cheesy, bright-eyed smile have cultivated a joyful and positive energy unlike any that I’ve seen before. Legitimately, I think Zohran’s infectious smile—and his social media team that captures it so well—is the main driver of these positive vibes. Just check out Zohran’s Instagram. BRO IS ALWAYS SMILING; THAT JOY IS TRANSFORMATIVE. Zohran flipped the script on the shadiness and toxicity of electoral politics that we’re all so exhausted by; and he provided an alternative that is hopeful, energizing, and actually fun.

This is how politics should be. People who care about each other, coming together to fight for a world that they care about. Enough with the gloom and doom. Nah, give me a vision. Give me SOMETHING TO BELIEVE IN. Something that allows me to express the love that I have burning inside me… the compassionate soul that so desperately wants to see a government that cares for its people. I know you feel it too.

And the thing is, Mr. Democratic Establishment, you CANNOT mobilize people at scale if your vibes suck. And, indeed, your vibes fucking suck. Politics is no different than throwing a party. If you’re unable to create an energizing atmosphere, people won’t stay for long.

Zohran’s campaign accomplished this in incredible fashion. FIFTY-THOUSAND volunteers showed out for the campaign, knocking on over a million doors in NYC. My friend woke up at 6AM to canvas for him on the morning of the election. All my little lefty friends were re-posting his Instagram videos. And my fan-boy-looking-ass is writing a blog about him from the opposite coast despite having little to no connection to the campaign. Still, I feel like I’m part of it.

2. None of that “Woke” Shit

Vibes are wonderful, but you can’t have vibes for dinner. A nutritious electoral campaign requires some actual substance… some policy proteins to accompany the vibes and veggies (lol). For Zohran, that policy agenda was a Bernie-ish brand of “democratic socialism.” Specifically, his campaign promised three main deliverables: (1) freezing the rent for rent-stabilized apartments, (2) making buses fast and free, and (3) providing free, universal childcare. Zohran proposed paying for this budget by increasing taxes on corporations and New Yorkers earning over $1 million dollars.

Each of these proposals is a classic, socialist policy, designed to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. What is distinct here, however, is THE LANGUAGE Zohran used to describe the proposals. Zohran didn’t use the “woke” and “academic” language that so many lefties learn in school and on Twitter… and that so many Americans have come to despise. He didn’t stick to woke buzzwords like “equity” and “intersectionality.” No, instead, Zohran spoke in the simplest of terms. “This is a campaign that, at its core, delivers a city that New Yorkers can afford.”

By framing his campaign around affordability, Zohran was able to package the socialist agenda in plain and simple terms. This did way more to resonate with the average voter than some of the other shit these lefties be saying about “seizing the means of production.” Bro, nobody knows what that means! I’m literally just trying to buy a sandwich.

All that said, Zohran’s rhetoric still wasn’t enough to truly win over the working class. If you look at the graph below, Zohran actually lost the lower-income vote by 11% and the Black vote by 17%. That’s really bad. The socialist movement needs to looks itself in the mirror and ask, if we truly represent the poor and the marginalized, then why aren’t they voting for us? We have a ways to go.

3. Authenticity

My final takeaway from Zohran’s campaign is that authenticity works. More than anything, people are craving a politician who speaks their mind… who is genuinely honest.

How do you prove that you are genuinely honest? My theory is that it involves two main parts. First, you have to give off authentic vibes using tone, body language, and facial expressions (Trump is masterful at this). Second, you have to stick to your principles, even when they are risky or unpopular.

This second part is tricky for politicians, because, sometimes, sticking to your principles literally is political suicide. On the other hand, if you spend your whole career having a “change of heart” whenever it becomes politically useful, then nobody will ever believe you.

I think Zohran struck this balance really well. While he did back down from “defund the police,” he stuck to his guns when it came to Palestine, his Muslim identity, and being a literal socialist. People observed this integrity, and that builds trust… something that, if you haven’t heard… our society is rather lacking.

What’s Next?

Zohran faces serious roadblocks ahead. My biggest concern is that his ability to tax the rich is constrained by the New York legislature. Without increasing those taxes, he won’t be able to generate the revenue to deliver on his promises to enact free childcare and transit. He’ll also be under a microscope as NYC’s “socialist mayor,” and the Democratic establishment may very well try to fuck him over.

Anyway! For now, let’s celebrate what is one of the most inspiring electoral campaigns of the recent decade. And then, let’s run it back in every city in the nation? No, seriously, if any of y’all are trying to do this back in Phoenix please hit me up. Let’s create a government that provides for everyone!

The best part about getting arrested is that all your friends are super nice to you. The worst part (so far, at least) is that your mom gets really worried. It feels a bit hard to balance all those conflicting emotions.

I want to talk more about that here in a second, but before I do, let me provide a bit of context. So, two days ago, me and some friends walked onto this “Certified Humane” Whole Foods farm out here in the Central Valley, and I rescued a baby goat. She was in pretty bad shape: recently separated from her mother, confined in a small, crowded pen, and suffering from some form of respiratory disease, possibly pneumonia. There’s a good chance that if I didn’t rescue her, she would have died.

The reason I know that is because the farm has this massive graveyard right next to it. It really reminds me of the elephant graveyard from Lion King (just this time the graveyard is real, and humans are responsible for the deaths). There’s probably thousands of bones and bodies strewn about, partially buried beneath mounds of dirt. Our team has investigated the graveyard about half a dozen times now, and every time, we find freshly dead goats added to the dead pile. (This specific farm has about 9,000 goats on site. With all the crowding, stress, and disease, inevitably, many of the babies die young.)

Our team reported these issues to the authorities, since animal cruelty and on-site dead piles are both illegal.1 Still, no one did anything to remedy the situation. That’s why me and the team took it upon ourselves to intervene.

And so we did. We investigated the facility; I rescued the baby goat, and, later, when the cops arrived, I told them exactly what we’d done. I described the dead pile and the sad animals. And I asked the cops to let us onto the facility so that we could provide aid to the many animals who were still suffering there. The officer wasn’t particularly receptive to that message, though, and he ended up arresting me and the rest of our team on the spot. (Video of the arrest below).

Negotiating with the police was definitely a nerve racking experience, but the arrest after that was actually quite chill. I got handcuffed, and then I just sat in the back of a cop car for a couple hours. After that, the officers released us at the local train station (so no one spent any time in jail), and now we’re just waiting to see whether they press charges. (Personally, I don’t think the prosecutor will press charges, just because that’ll draw more attention to the animal abuse unfolding at the farm. But I wouldn’t be too surprised either way).

So that’s what happened two days ago. But now let me tell you a bit about the ups & downs of my internal world since then.

The biggest upside has definitely been my friends. Their reactions have been overwhelmingly positive, and I honestly don’t think I’ve ever had so many people reach out to me and offer support. People saying that I inspire them; people calling me a hero; people thanking me for standing up for the animals. That all feels super good, and I feel so grateful to have that support. Genuinely, the only reason I have the courage to do what I did is because I know that I have friends like y’all behind me. Without that, I’d be so much more afraid.

The praise I’m receiving also feels sort of uncomfortable, though. Like, don’t get me wrong, I love receiving praise. But also, it’s just like, woah, my actions really moved you to tears? I actually made you feel something? I honestly didn’t realize I had the power to inspire people like that. That is a new, wonderful, and strange feeling. I have never felt more like a celebrity. (I can also see how public facing activism can really inflate someone’s ego. Note to myself to never become too ego-driven).

At the same time, there’s also something really beautiful about all the support I’ve received post-arrest. Being arrested is something that’s quite scary and quite stigmatized. But when everyone starts applauding you for getting arrested, that does a lot to counter all the fear and stigma around the carceral system. This has got to be how Dr. King and the civil rights movement inspired so many people to get arrested. Sure, mainstream society might call us crazy and criminal. But in the microcosm of my local community—the community that I actually care about—this arrest is a badge of honor. That totally flips the social dynamics on their head.

These reverse social dynamics can be somewhat dangerous, because if people are getting arrested just for the clout, that’s probably going to cause some problems down the line (like egotistical infighting). But also, these social dynamics are INSANELY powerful, and probably one of the main keys to uprooting a system like animal agriculture. After all, the main reason animal ag is able to get away with its crimes is because people are too afraid to challenge its status. No one wants to be the weird loner guy who keeps going on about that weird animal thing. But do you know who people do want to be? They want to be the brave citizen; the conscientious objector; the person who spoke out against injustice, even when it wasn’t popular. We all want to be on the right side of history. Our movement just has to capture enough momentum to make people realize… our victory is inevitable.

And I promise you that it is. Animal abusers will become the villains of history; animal advocates the heroes. I’m not entirely sure when this transformation will happen, but, on an intuitive level, I just feel so certain that it will. I know that humanity is a compassionate species, and I know that we’re better than what we’re doing to animals. I see the proof of it everyday.

The other thing that stands out to me here is how actions really do speak louder than words. I didn’t deliver any fiery speeches yesterday, and I didn’t say anything that I haven’t been saying for the last five years. And yet, because I was arrested—because I offered a genuine sacrifice—more people in my life are paying attention, and taking me seriously, than ever before. That’s honestly so powerful. Sacrifice is the social proof that people really do care. And when people see other people caring, then they start to care a bit too.

So that’s been the biggest upside of the arrest. But the biggest downside is that my mom is really worried and disappointed. I feel super guilty about that to be honest. I want to be a good son; I want to make my family proud; and I never want to cause my parents stress. And yet that is directly in conflict with the stand I have taken for the animals. I wish I knew how to navigate that better. Maybe I can just convince the entire Indian & Sikh community to join me in the struggle and then my parents will come around. Just kidding. But actually that’s not a bad idea.

Anyway, we’ll wait and see what more comes of this. For now, what I know for sure is that there is a baby goat—no longer suffering and neglected—but cared for and safe. For the first time in her life, she will step foot on soft grass, and she will see the sky open up before her. For that alone, this has all been worth it.

Thanks if you read this far, and keep standing up for the animals! That doesn’t have to mean going vegetarian or anything. It just means caring for our fellow creatures, in whatever way possible. Let’s keep dreaming.

This plan is a rather straightforward attempt to package animal rights within Republican values like austerity, nationalism, and anti-Democrat sentiment. Founded by a former Republican strategist, White Coat Waste has pursued this messaging strategy for the last decade, masterfully blending animal rights with traditional, conservative talking points. Who said vegans can’t be friends with Trumpers?

In particular, White Coat Waste often prioritizes its “government waste” framing. The org’s central mantra is “Stop Taxpayer Funded Animal Experiments!” And the org’s name is predicated on the idea that “white coats”—or animal experimenters—are a waste of taxpayer dollars. (For context, the majority of animal experiments are funded by the federal government, costing taxpayers about $15 billion per year.)

Whatever your views on this pro-MAGA strategy, it’s at least worth assessing whether or not it has been effective. And, over the last decade, White Coat Waste has almost certainly been the most effective anti-vivisection org in America. Despite its small staffing, the org has secured many impressive wins for laboratory animals including:

• Influencing the EPA’s decision to phase out chemical research on mammals by 2035 (Trump implemented this policy in 2019; Biden later reversed it);

• Requiring the National Institutes of Health, the largest funder of animal experiments, to explore alternatives to primate testing; and

• Ending all dog and cat testing conducted by the Department of Veteran Affairs.

These policy wins aside, what’s most impressive to me are White Coat Waste’s cultural wins within the Republican party. Almost singlehandedly, WCW has created space for Republicans to proudly oppose animal testing. Just watch this clip of Rand Paul promising to protect a beagle from Dr. Fauci, or this viral video from a congressional hearing on “Taxpayer Funded Animal Cruelty,” where Rep. Nancy Mace slams the Dems for funding experiments on “transgender mice.” Somehow, White Coat Waste has transformed an issue once associated with PETA vegans into a conservative cause championed by MAGA Republicans.

As a coastal liberal elite, this rightward turn is somewhat discomforting to me, especially when the messaging adopts an anti-trans framing. We shouldn’t disparage human rights to elevate animal rights.

That said, I applaud White Coat Waste for succeeding where every other pro-animal org has failed. While the rest of the animal movement has been busy slapping “cruelty-free” labels onto hand soaps and shampoo, White Coat Waste has successfully politicized vivisection on the federal level.1 Today, they have built a supportive coalition of federal congress members and secured multiple, nationwide policy wins. Indeed, White Coat Waste is doing more to help the animals tormented in laboratories than anyone else. For that, I have tremendous respect.

Now, how exactly did this little-known nonprofit of twelve staff members create these cracks in the federal government’s support for animal experimentation?

The main key appears to be WCW’s partisan framing. This conservative bend has drawn multiple Republicans on board, allowing a small, anti-vivisection group to get its foot in the door of the federal bureaucracy. In particular, I can’t imagine WCW being nearly as successful without its “government waste” narrative—a narrative that the animal movement previously neglected.

For the rest of the movement, there is surely something to be learned from WCW’s successful use of partisanship. Many animal advocates are afraid to enter the partisan sphere, seeking to avoid the pettiness and gridlock that accompanies partisan politics. But, as WCW has shown, there are also immense benefits to a partisan strategy. Namely, that federal politicians actually hear you out!

This comports with one of the most fundamental persuasion tactics: knowing your audience. If Republicans want to cut government waste, then give them a reason to! If Republicans want to dunk on the libs, then throw them a lob! These partisan framings are, in the short term, far more effective than strict, pro-animal messagings. Today’s politicians simply do not see the political value in tying their image to the classic, animal rights platform. WCW solves this problem by providing a curated rebrand.

I don’t want to oversell things, though. While WCW has made a dent in federal support for animal testing, it is truly just that… a dent. So far, almost all of WCW’s wins concern peripheral targets like foreign laboratories, transgender-related experiments, or testing on charismatic animals like cats, dogs, and monkeys (95 % percent of laboratory animals are rats and mice). That leaves the bulk of federal animal testing—the annual $5 billion funded by the NIH—intact. Thus, while WCW has certainly gotten its foot in the door, it is far from propping it all the way open.

I predict that this is where WCW’s partisan strategy will begin to diminish in success. While you might convince Republicans to defund Chinese and transgender experiments, it’s much more difficult to convince them to slash the funds at the heart of the biomedical industry. In large part, that is a product of the industry’s widespread power and influence. For example, in opposition to WCW, the biomedical industry is already developing counter-messaging that emphasizes the economic benefits of vivisection. Industry lobbyists will hammer this message, confusing Republicans who previously believed that vivisection was “wasteful.”

Ultimately, this leads us back to the conclusion that animal rights has to be about the animals. You can’t trick the entire Republican party into cutting vivisection because it’s wasteful, or foreign, or transgender. These descriptors simply do not apply to all forms of vivisection. The real reason to end vivisection is because IT’S WRONG TO TORTURE ANIMALS. There is no way to justify subjecting earth’s most vulnerable creatures to endure suffering on humanity’s behalf. That is no different than the Nazis experimenting on Jewish people, or the U.S. government experimenting on Black people. Justice requires that benefits and harms be fairly distributed. Animals should not bear the burden, only for humanity to reap the benefits.

To overcome the biomedical industry, ending vivisection will require a social movement to unshakingly express these moral values.2 This movement must center the animals, and directly confront the speciesism woven into our government institutions. Appealing to partisan interests is a useful strategy, but it only gets us so far.

Coming Soon

Next week, I’ll publish Part II of this blog. I plan to write more about how White Coat Waste’s partisan strategy can be adapted to the farmed animal context, but with a confrontational twist!

I hope you’ve all been well. Enjoy today.