What is it they don’t understand about “Congress shall make no law...”? This Sunstein character ought to be a laughing stock, not a presidential appointee. He is a whackjob of the first magnitude. This is the one who wants to give animals lawyers. He also thinks he is smarter than our Founding Fathers (as does Obama). Any rational society would have marginalized him long ago for his irrational beliefs and writings.
wikipedia-—>>>
Animal rights
A tiny fraction of Sunstein’s work has addressed the question of animal rights. “Every reasonable person believes in animal rights,” he says, continuing that “we might conclude that certain practices cannot be defended and should not be allowed to continue, if, in practice, mere regulation will inevitably be insufficient—and if, in practice, mere regulation will ensure that the level of animal suffering will remain very high.” [16]
Sunstein’s views on animal rights generated controversy when Sen.Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) blocked his appointment to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs by Obama. Chambliss objected to the introduction of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a volume edited by Sunstein and his then-partner Martha Nussbaum. On page 11 of the introduction, during a philosophical discussion about whether animals should be thought of as owned by humans, Sunstein notes that personhood need not be conferred upon an animal in order to grant it various legal protections against abuse or cruelty, even including legal standing for suit. For example, under current law, if someone saw their neighbor beating a dog, they currently cannot sue for animal cruelty because they do not have legal standing to do so. Sunstein suggests that granting standing to animals, actionable by other parties, could decrease animal cruelty by increasing the likelihood that animal abuse will be punished.
Congress won’t.
FCC will.