SANTA ROSA, Calif. – A Sonoma County judge declined a request on Wednesday from prosecutors to impose a gag order on animal rights activist Zoe Rosenberg, allowing her to speak freely about her ongoing criminal case. Rosenberg is charged with rescuing four sick chickens from a Perdue-owned slaughterhouse in June 2023.
Superior Court Judge Kenneth Gnoss deemed the proposed gag order “overbroad and vague by any constitutional standard.” His ruling highlighted the importance of public discourse surrounding the case, which features perspectives from both Rosenberg’s supporters and critics, including Bill Mattos, president of the California Poultry Federation, who has labeled her actions a “terrorist act.”
At 22 years old, Rosenberg is a student at UC Berkeley and an investigator for the activist group Direct Action Everywhere (DxE). She faces one felony conspiracy charge and four misdemeanors, including theft and trespassing, related to an incident at Petaluma Poultry. Rosenberg and several others reportedly entered the facility to document alleged animal neglect and ended up rescuing four chickens named Poppy, Ivy, Aster, and Azalea.
In a statement shared by DxE, Rosenberg expressed relief over the judge’s ruling, asserting that the District Attorney aimed to suppress her voice to keep the public unaware of the conditions at the Perdue facility. “I’m glad that I’ll be able to continue telling the stories of the four chickens who were suffering without care when I rescued them,” she said, noting that they are now safe and thriving.
Rosenberg’s legal team opposed the gag order, contending it would infringe on her First Amendment rights. Chris Carraway, her attorney from the Animal Activist Legal Defense Project, praised the court’s decision. He argued that the request for a gag order was a blatant attempt to restrict Rosenberg’s right to speak about her case.
The prosecution recently dropped one of the theft charges against Rosenberg, a move interpreted by advocates as a tactic to avoid introducing evidence regarding the condition of the rescued chickens that could support her defense.
Public interest in the case has surged, prompting over 13,000 signatures on a petition urging Sonoma County District Attorney Carla Rodriguez to prioritize prosecuting animal cruelty rather than those who rescue animals. The case has reignited discussions around animal treatment in industrial farming and the risks activists face when engaging in rescue missions.
Petaluma Poultry, a subsidiary of Perdue Farms, has consistently denied allegations of animal cruelty. The company supplies major grocery chains, including Trader Joe’s, and has faced criticism from DxE investigations that pointed out unsanitary conditions within its operations.
Reports indicate that Petaluma Poultry’s slaughterhouse has a significantly higher-than-average rate of salmonella and campylobacter, pathogens linked to serious health concerns for humans. The local media has contributed to the conversation by sponsoring billboards asking whether Rosenberg should face prison time for rescuing chickens.
Rosenberg’s trial is set to commence on September 15 in Santa Rosa, with a pretrial hearing scheduled for June 13. During this hearing, her attorneys plan to argue a “necessity defense,” which allows for illegal actions taken to prevent greater harm. In this case, they will contend that rescuing the chickens was essential to mitigate further suffering and to shed light on public health risks associated with industrial poultry farming.
Judge Gnoss’s recent ruling emphasizes the importance of free speech in cases of public interest, framing Rosenberg’s situation as a focal point in the ongoing debate over animal rights, food safety, and the legal challenges faced by activists.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by sending an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.