Animal Law Review
First Page
1
Abstract
This Comment examines South Carolina’s 2024 bond-or-forfeit statute (H.B. 3682) as a case study in the growing trend of extending existing legal frameworks to promote animal welfare. Traditionally, asset forfeiture treats animals purely as property subject to seizure. However, by shifting the costs of caring for seized animals from public agencies to the animals’ owners, H.B. 3682 embeds a concern for animal well-being into a framework historically focused on economic and property interests. This Comment argues that bond-or-forfeit statutes are part of a broader trend toward recognizing animals as sentient beings with welfare interests distinct from their owners’ property rights. Through analysis of South Carolina’s law and comparable developments in family law, domestic violence protection, and estate planning, this Comment situates H.B. 3682 as one piece of a growing body of animal welfare law. Ultimately, it contends that bond-or-forfeit statutes not only alleviate financial strain on local agencies but also advance a conceptual shift toward treating animals as victims rather than mere property.
Recommended Citation
Morgan Mercer,
Asset Forfeiture as an Animal Welfare Law: A Case Study on South Carolina's Bond-or-Forfeit Statute,
32
Animal L. Rev.
1
(2026).
Available at:
https://lawcommons.lclark.edu/alr/vol32/iss1/2
Included in
Animal Law Commons, Animal Studies Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Society Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons