Smarter Justice for Animals in Texas Through Artificial Intelligence

Priscilla Connor & Shannon W. Conway, Contributing Author*

Priscilla Connor is a 3L student at UNT Dallas College of Law

Shannon W. Conway is an associate professor at UNT Dallas College of Law

ISSUE 17

SPRING 2025

AI

I. Introduction

To see the supplementary infographic for this article, click here.

Our world has been inundated with Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) for some time. YouTube’s video recommendations, spell check corrections, and nearly all other digital conveniences are the products of AI.¹ In the legal industry, law students unabashedly use AI to help with their studies; in fact, many law schools are now embracing AI and incorporating its use into their curricula.² Think of artificial intelligence, particularly Generative Pre-trained Transformers (“GPT”), like a brain that has been exposed to vast amounts of information.³ And when it comes to practicing lawyers, well, perhaps it is best to say their use of AI and the courts’ willingness to embrace that use of AI is a work-in-progress.⁴ But with AI’s ability to increase research and discovery efficiency, it has the potential to vastly reduce the financial burden of litigation and become an incredibly useful tool in the legal industry.

This article focuses on the potential use of AI in animal cruelty cases in Texas courts, which have proven to be challenging to prosecute. Part I provides a general overview of the types of animal cruelty cases that may be prosecuted in Texas and the challenges their prosecutions present. Part II proposes how AI might be incorporated to meet those challenges and discusses the ethical and practical considerations that must be taken into account. Part III concludes with suggestions for future applications of AI in animal cruelty law.

II.      The Types of Animal Cruelty Cases Prosecuted in Texas and the Challenges They Present

Texas’ Animal Cruelty Laws

Compared to other states, Texas has significant room for improvement in its laws to protect animals. Texas’ animal cruelty laws do not include protection for circus animals, wild animals, or animals used in experiments. As one example, unlike in California, the animal cruelty laws in Texas do not include the protection of circus animals, wild animals, and animals used in experiments.⁵

However, the Texas Penal Code does at least contain some provisions intended for the protection of animals. The first law is Texas Penal Code Section 42.09, titled “Cruelty to Livestock Animals.” Under this law, it is illegal for a person to “intentionally or knowingly” engage in actions such as torturing, neglecting (by failing to provide food, water, or care), abandoning, cruelly confining, or poisoning animals.⁶ Section 42.09 defines several additional specific offenses, including causing animals to fight one another, using livestock as a lure in dog race training or dog coursing on a racetrack, tripping horses, or severely overworking an animal.⁷

The punishment for cruelty to livestock animals depends on the specific offense and the offender’s prior convictions.⁸ For offenses like overworking, cruelly confining, or failing to provide food or water, the crime is classified as a Class A misdemeanor, carrying a penalty of up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $4,000.⁹ However, if the offender has two or more prior convictions under either Section 42.09 (Cruelty to Livestock Animals) or Section 42.092 (Cruelty to Non-Livestock Animals), the offense is upgraded to a state jail felony, punishable by 180 days to two years in a state jail facility and a fine of up to $10,000.¹⁰

More severe offenses, such as torturing, poisoning, killing, or causing serious bodily injury to livestock, are classified as state jail felonies, with a sentence range from 180 days to two years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.¹¹ If the offender has two or more prior convictions under either Section 42.09 or Section 42.092, the charge is elevated to a third-degree felony, which is punishable by 2 to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.¹²

Texas Penal Code Section 42.092 is titled “Cruelty to Nonlivestock.” This law criminalizes various forms of cruelty and neglect.¹³ It effectively requires individuals who have custody of animals to provide essential care, including food, water, shelter, and medical treatment, to ensure the animals’ well-being.¹⁴ The statute defines several acts of cruelty, including intentional torture or infliction of serious bodily injury on an animal, killing or poisoning without the owner’s consent, neglect, abandonment, inhumane confinement, and forcing animals to fight.¹⁵ The law also prohibits using live animals as bait in dog racing and overworking animals to the point of suffering.¹⁶

There are defenses available under the law, such as acting in self-defense against dangerous wild animals or participating in lawful hunting or scientific research. Additionally, humane programs like Trap-Neuter-Return, which manages stray animal populations, are not considered abandonment under Section 42.092.¹⁷ Violations of Section 42.092 can lead to criminal charges that range from Class A misdemeanors to felonies, with the specific charge depending on the severity of the offense and the individual’s criminal history.¹⁸

Texas also has laws specifically addressing assistance animals. Texas Penal Code Section 42.091 focuses on the protection of assistance animals, such as service dogs, acknowledging their vital role in supporting individuals with disabilities.¹⁹ Under this law, it is an offense to intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly harm an assistance animal, including allowing one's own animal to attack an assistance animal.²⁰ The severity of the crime depends on the harm inflicted: a Class A misdemeanor for an attack, a state jail felony for causing injury, and a third-degree felony for killing an assistance animal.²¹

Despite the laws that Texas has in place, it is still a daunting task for prosecutors to proceed with a trial against an offender. This is where artificial intelligence can step in and make a meaningful difference. By leveraging AI’s ability to analyze large volumes of data, identify trends, and assist in evidence evaluation, AI can help bridge the gaps in enforcement, increase the accuracy of investigations, and ultimately lead to more successful prosecutions of animal cruelty cases.

Prosecuting Animal Cruelty Cases in Texas and the Associated Challenges

Shelby Bobosky, Executive Director of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, identifies three primary obstacles that hinder the full prosecution of animal cruelty cases in Texas: (1) a lack of clear evidence; (2) a lack of funding and resources to bring these cases to trial; and (3) juries’ dismissive attitudes toward dog cruelty cases.²²

These obstacles do not simply hinder the prosecution of these cases. They allow abusers to avoid paying for their actions, and without the guarantee of retribution, future abusers cannot be deterred from committing these crimes.²³ The first obstacle is the lack of reliable evidence that prosecutors can use to prove animal cruelty; after all, animals cannot take the witness stand.²⁴ Additionally, many of the cases of animal cruelty are reported anonymously, so the person reporting rarely testifies.²⁵ Without costly expert testimony—like forensic veterinarians—it is difficult to establish the necessary evidence for a guilty verdict.²⁶

The second is that the cost of animal cruelty cases can add up quickly.²⁷ For example, when an animal has died, a necropsy—an examination of an animal after it has died—is often required to determine the cause of death.²⁸ This process is both time-consuming and expensive. A pathologist will carefully dissect, observe, and document his findings and draw a conclusion about the cause of death of the animal. Lawyers can use those pathologists as witnesses in animal cruelty cases, but they also add financial strain to an already expensive process of prosecuting such cases.²⁹

The third obstacle involves the lack of investment from juries.³⁰ Surprisingly, juries often struggle to take animal cruelty cases seriously, seeing them as a waste of time and resources. Some jurors voice their frustration, saying things like, “What are we doing here? It’s just a dog.”³¹ This kind of unsympathetic attitude makes it more difficult to secure convictions: jurors simply do not recognize the seriousness of these crimes and the broader impact of animal abuse.³²

While artificial intelligence might take jobs away from the market and may not always be the most reliable, AI can be beneficial to prosecutors because it can find evidence in all corners of the digital world, move quickly and accurately, and potentially saves prosecutors a significant amount of time in preparation for their animal cruelty cases.

III.          How AI Can Assist in Prosecution and the Ethical and Practical Considerations

Evidence Collection and Analysis

Artificial intelligence is rapidly becoming a critical tool in the courtroom, providing innovative ways to collect evidence.³³ AI technology allows “users to quickly search through billions of photos to help identify an unknown suspect in a crime scene photo.”³⁴ As one example, in cases where perpetrators attempt to remain anonymous, such as when witnesses share footage of animal abuse or dog fighting online, AI can analyze these images, cross-reference them with databases, and identify the culprit.³⁵ AI’s assistance in analyzing shared videos of animal cruelty is significantly more efficient than the current manual process used by some prosecutors. As the Animal Legal Defense Fund explains, law enforcement must retrieve original uploads, metadata, and IP addresses before evidence disappears.³⁶ AI can expedite this process by quickly identifying and preserving key digital traces.³⁷

In lay terms: (1) law enforcement will first contact the host site to get the original content that was uploaded, the date and time it was uploaded, any data regarding the location the file was posted from if they maintain that data, the IP address, and any interaction other individuals had with the post; and (2) once the officer has these details, law enforcement is able to send legal process to the poster’s Internet Service Provider (ISP) for the subscriber information associated with the IP address used to complete the upload.³⁸

The dark web is home to the most heinous of crimes, including animal fighting rings, animal torture and abuse, and illegal animal trade; many of these dogs endure extreme cruelty and spend their lives in isolation on heavy chains and are often conditioned with anabolic steroids to increase aggression.³⁹ Fights can last hours, leaving dogs with severe injuries such as broken bones, deep wounds, and even fatal blood loss. Despite dogfighting being a felony in all 50 states and U.S. Territories, it continues to persist across the country, often linked to illegal gambling and other criminal activities.⁴⁰

One of the most infamous cases that sparked outrage, and legal action was in 2007—the Michael Vick case.⁴¹ A month after Vick’s arrest, former President George W. Bush signed a law that made dog fighting a felony at the federal level.⁴² Despite increased awareness and harsher legal consequences, the issue continues to persist. Most dog fighting rings are found in the southeastern United States.⁴³ This is due to the efforts of the U.S. Attorney's office in South Carolina, which has two prosecutors dedicated to dog fighting cases.⁴⁴ This shows that animal cruelty is widespread but also shows that, with the right resources, these cases can be successfully prosecuted, and cruelty can be reduced.

We know that AI systems are trained by ingesting large datasets, including information from the internet, to learn, decode, and make them readily accessible for human understanding.⁴⁵ AI can also scour the dark web to detect content related to animal cruelty, uncovering hidden networks and enabling law enforcement to act.

Another significant advantage of AI in prosecuting animal cruelty is its ability to analyze vast amounts of data to detect patterns, such as identifying serial offenders. By processing large datasets, AI can track trends over time and across different locations, helping investigators identify individuals who repeatedly engage in animal cruelty. This technology can also monitor social media platforms and online marketplaces for signs of animal abuse, such as the illegal sale of animals or involvement in dog fighting rings. AI can automatically flag suspicious activities, alerting authorities and providing them with crucial evidence that may otherwise go unnoticed.

By leveraging AI’s capacity to analyze images, videos, social media, and large datasets, we can improve evidence collection, track abusers, and ultimately ensure that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions. As AI continues to evolve, it will be an invaluable ally in the ongoing battle to protect animals from cruelty and exploitation.

Saving Money and Resources

For prosecutors, conducting legal research is vital to preparing a strong case, and like with any cause, achieving a successful result typically requires exhausting all legal research sources. Even for the most skilled practitioners, legal research can be complicated and time-consuming. Before AI, legal research meant lawyers had to pour over case law, statutes, and legal precedent to find the best cases to support their argument (at one time, even sitting in a library reading actual books!).⁴⁶

The legal community can use AI to speed up case preparation and optimize workflows. AI tools can automate labor-intensive tasks such as evidence review and drafting motions, legal briefs, and settlement agreements.⁴⁷ Indeed, the adoption of AI in legal research and drafting has the potential to substantially decrease both the time and financial resources expended by prosecutors. This technological advancement allows prosecutors to make more efficient use of public funds. But changing legal processes creates important ethical and practical considerations.

Ethical and Practical Considerations

In the documentary What’s Next? The Future with Bill Gates, the renowned filmmaker, James Cameron, shares his concerns about the future of AI in an interview with Bill Gates. Cameron states, “I think we’re going to get to a point where we’re putting our faith more and more and more in the machines without humans in the loop, and that can be problematic.”⁴⁸

He compares the growing anxiety about AI to the fear and frustration that individuals experience with early-onset dementia because, in both instances, people feel a loss of control.⁴⁹ This sense of helplessness, Cameron notes, leads to anger and depression because the threat of AI, much like the symptoms of Alzheimer's and dementia, appears inevitable and unrelenting. He challenges the AI community to relieve the anxiety and fear that people are feeling towards this dooming form of intelligence.⁵⁰

The benefits of AI in law cannot be discussed without acknowledging its downsides. One major downside is the impact on jobs within the legal profession. According to a CBS News MoneyWatch report by Elizabeth Napolitano, AI eliminated nearly 4,000 jobs in May 2023.⁵¹ This solidifies the fear that AI could replace human roles rather than simply assist them. Specifically, in the context of animal cruelty cases, AI could reduce the need for certain investigative positions and even lessen the number of prosecutors required in the courtroom, raising important ethical and practical considerations.⁵²

Another notable downside is the severely lacking reliability in the use of AI in the courtroom. AI has been known to have “hallucinations,” which is the creation of fake information to provide an answer to the user.⁵³ In February 2025, attorneys from the firm Morgan & Morgan faced potential penalties for submitting fictitious case citations in a lawsuit against Walmart, attributed to AI-generated inaccuracies.⁵⁴ In 2024, the Colorado Court of Appeals heard a case where a plaintiff representing themselves presented the court with a brief containing GAI-derived hallucinations.⁵⁵ Although the court decided to not impose penalties here, it made it known that anyone who presents the court with filings that include GAI-generated hallucination may face discipline from the court.⁵⁶ A study by Stanford University revealed that the popular AI-driven legal research systems “Lexis+” and “Practical Law” produced incorrect information more than 17% of the time, while Westlaw’s AI-Assisted Research hallucinated more than 34% of the time.”⁵⁷

These instances emphasize the necessity for legal professionals to meticulously verify AI-generated information to satisfy their ethical standards and ensure the accuracy of legal documents. AI will not be eliminated from the workplace, especially in law firms and courthouses. So, it is also important for clear protocols to be established. That could include mandatory oversight by humans during each stage in using AI for legal research, in addition to more training on the limitations of AI and how it should be used as a tool rather than a replacement for critical thinking and professional expertise.

IV.          Future Prospects for the Use of AI in Animal Cruelty Law

Examples of AI’s use in Wildlife Tracking

Authorities have discovered people harvesting endangered sea turtles and shipping their parts abroad; other perpetrators mutilate hawks and eagles to make jewelry. If someone were to be caught for this crime, the punishment could range from a class D misdemeanor to a felony, with federal charges, and significant penalties costing tens of thousands of dollars.⁵⁸

The AI Guardian of Endangered Species 2.0 is one of the most recent advancements in artificial intelligence designed to combat the evolving trends of illegal wildlife trade online. With an average accuracy rate of 86%, this technology can identify illegal wildlife products and flag them for prosecution.⁵⁹ Organizations such as the International Fund for Animal Welfare have developed AI tools that analyze images of trafficked wildlife products, boasting an accuracy rate of 75%.⁶⁰ These innovations represent a significant step forward in the fight against wildlife trafficking.⁶¹

AI's role in forensic investigations extends to illegal wildlife trafficking as well. By analyzing online transactions and monitoring the sale of exotic animals or endangered species, AI can assist in uncovering illegal trade networks. With the ability to detect suspicious behavior across digital spaces, AI can provide law enforcement with real-time insights into illegal trafficking activities, helping to dismantle criminal networks.⁶²

Offering Affordable Care

Animal neglect is another, less overt form of animal abuse. And it is not always insidious; a family in poverty may be unable to afford the medical care their beloved pet needs, or a competent veterinarian may not be available within driving distance. In Texas, nearly 60% of households have at least one pet.⁶³ However, there are only about 5,600 veterinarians in the state.⁶⁴

AI is being trained to act as a medical doctor for remote villages without access to a medical care provider.⁶⁵ It could also be trained as a veterinarian. For example, AI can analyze images or videos of an animal and identify symptoms of malnutrition, injury, or illness, offering potential solutions for intervention. This technology could be vital for pet owners in underserved areas, giving them valuable diagnostic insights when they don’t have easy access to a vet.

V.            Conclusion

Prosecutors can leverage artificial intelligence to seek justice and provide a voice for abused animals. Although the prosecutors work as many cases as they can considering the demands on their time, animal cruelty and illegal animal trafficking continue to be overlooked problems in our society. AI can help curb those issues by serving as a quick, rational, and resourceful partner empowering prosecutors to get justice for the far-too-many animals subjected to cruelty.

---

Suggested Citation: Priscilla Connor & Shannon W. Conway, Smarter Justice for Animals in Texas Through Artificial Intelligence, ACCESSIBLE LAW, Spring 2025, at 1.

AccessibleLaw_Smarter Justice for Animals in Texas Through AI.pdf

Download PDF • 319KB

Sources:

* Priscilla Connor is a third-year law student at UNT Dallas College of Law, where her Contributing Author, Shannon W. Conway, is an Assistant Professor of Law teaching Torts, Insurance Law, and International Criminal Law.

[1] What’s Next: The Future with Bill Gates, Netflix (Sept. 18, 2024), https://www.netflix.com/watch/81680791.   

[2] ABA Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence releases survey on AI and legal education, ABA News (June 24, 2024),https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2024/06/aba-task-force-law-and-ai-survey/#:~:text=More%20than%20half%20of%20the,to%20use%20AI%20tools%20effectively.

[3] Id.

[4] See, e.g., Al-Hamim v. Star Hearthstone, LLC, No. 24CA0190, 2024 WL 5230126, at *5 (Colo. Ct. App. Dec. 26, 2024) (quoting Practice of Law, and Closing the Access to Justice, 53 Colo. Law. 40, 43 (2024)) (noting that reliance on an AI “tool not trained with legal authorities can ‘lead both unwitting lawyers and nonlawyers astray.’”).

[5] In 2020, California enacted the Circus Cruelty Prevention Act, which states that “a person shall not sponsor, conduct, or operate a circus . . . that uses any animal other than a domestic dog, domestic cat, or domesticated horse”, or “exhibit or use any other animals than those animals.” Cal. Fish & Game Code § 2209. See also Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. Tit. 10, § 1500-M (protecting defenseless animals in a different way by prohibiting manufacturers from selling a cosmetic if it was developed or manufactured using cosmetic animal testing that was conducted or contracted for by the manufacturer or any supplier of the manufacturer.”).

[6] Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 42.09(a).

[7] Id.

[8] Id. § 42.09(c).

[9] Id. § 12.35(a).

[10] Id. §§ 42.09(c), 12.35(a).

[11] Id. § 12.35(a)–(b).

[12] Id. §§ 42.092(c-2), 12.34(a)–(b).

[13] Id. § 42.092(a).

[14] Id. § 42.092(a)(3).

[15] Id. § 42.092(a).

[16] Id. § 42.092(a)(8)–(9).

[17] Id. § 42.092(c).

[18] Id. § 42.092.

[19] Id. § 42.091.

[20] Id. § 42.091(a)–(b).

[21] Id. § 42.091(c).

[22] Interview with Shelby Bobosky, Exec. Dir., Tex. Humane Legis. Network, in Dall., Tex. (Feb. 10, 2025).

[23] Id.

[24] Id.

[25] Id.

[26] Id.

[27] Id.

[28] Necropsy, Am. Coll. of Veterinary Pathologists, https://www.acvp.org/page/Necropsy (last visited Feb. 23, 2025).

[29] Id.

[30] Bobosky, supra note 22.

[31] Bobosky, supra note 22.

[32] Bobosky, supra note 22.

[33] See Facial Recognition Technology: Federal Law Enforcement Agency Efforts Related to Civil Rights and Training, Pub. Briefing before the U.S. Comm’n on Civ. Rights, at 1 (Mar. 8, 2024) (opening remarks of Gretta L. Goodwin, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, U.S. Government Accountability Office), https://www.gao.gov/assets/870/868079.pdf.

[34] Id.

[35] Ben Nancholas, Digital eyes: The rise of image recognition, Univ. of Wolverhampton (Apr. 5, 2024), https://online.wlv.ac.uk/digital-eyes-the-rise-of-image-recognition/.

[36] What To Do if You Witness Animal Cruelty Online, Animal Legal Def. Fund, https://aldf.org/article/what-to-do-if-you-witness-animal-cruelty-online/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).

[37] Id.

[38] Id.

[39] Id.

[40] The Criminal, Underground World of Dogfighting, ASPCA, https://www.aspca.org/investigations-rescue/dogfighting (last visited Feb. 25, 2025).

[41] Case Study: Animal Fighting—Michael Vicks, Animal Legal Def. Fund (Dec. 15, 2010), https://aldf.org/case/case-study-animal-fighting-michael-vick/.

[42] Isabelle Chapman, Inside the underground world of dog fighting: How the brutal blood sport thrives in the shadows, CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/27/us/underground-dog-fighting-seizures-invs/index.html (Dec. 27, 2023, 8:10 AM).

[43] Id.

[44] Id.

[45] Netflix, supra note 1.

[46] Jonathan Ciottone, The Economic Benefits of AI in Civil Defense Litigation, The Nat’l L. Rev. (July 18, 2024), https://natlawreview.com/article/economic-benefits-ai-civil-defense-litigation.

[47] AI for Legal Research: A Guide for Legal Professionals, Bloomberg Law, https://pro.bloomberglaw.com/insights/technology/ai-for-legal-research (last visited Feb. 23, 2025).

[48] Netflix, supra note 1.

[49] Netflix, supra note 1.

[50] Netflix, supra note 1.

[51] Elizabeth Napolitano, AI eliminated nearly 4,000 jobs in May, report says, CNN (June 2, 2023, 5:59 PM), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ai-job-losses-artificial-intelligence-challenger-report/.

[52] Id.

[53] Sara Merken, AI 'hallucinations' in court papers spell trouble for lawyers, Reuters (Feb. 18, 2025, 2:55 PM), https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/ai-hallucinations-court-papers-spell-trouble-lawyers-2025-02-18/.

[54] Id.

[55] GAI is generative artificial intelligence that creates new material that “mimics human-like creativity.” What is GenAI?, snapLogic,https://www.snaplogic.com/glossary/what-is-genai (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).

[56] Al-Hamim v. Star Hearthstone, LLC, No. 24CA0190, 2024 WL 5230126, at *8 (Colo. Ct. App. Dec. 26, 2024).

[57] Faiz Surani & Daniel E. Ho, AI on Trial: Legal Models Hallucinate in 1 out of 6 (or More) Benchmarking Queries, Stanford Univ. HAI(May 23, 2024), https://hai.stanford.edu/news/ai-trial-legal-models-hallucinate-1-out-6-or-more-benchmarking-queries.

[58] Id.

[59] Press Release, Int’l Fund for Animal Welfare, Disrupting wildlife trade with an advanced AI solution (Nov. 21, 2024), https://www.ifaw.org/press-releases/disrupting-wildlife-trade-advanced-ai-solution.

[60] Id.

[61] Press Release, Int’l Fund for Animal Welfare, AI Guardian of Endangered Species recognizes images of illegal wildlife products with 75% accuracy (Apr. 22, 2020), https://www.ifaw.org/press-releases/ai-endangered-species-recognize-images-illegal-wildlife.

[62] Id.

[63] Pet Ownership Statistics by State 2025, World Population Rev., https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/pet-ownership-statistics-by-state (last visited March 22, 2024).

[64] Texas must tackle veterinarian shortage, Dall. Morning News (July 8, 2024, 2:00 AM), https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2024/07/08/texas-must-tackle-veterinarian-shortage/.

[65] Netflix, supra note 1.