{"id":782166,"date":"2026-10-20T09:39:24","date_gmt":"2026-10-20T13:39:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=782166"},"modified":"2026-10-20T10:02:47","modified_gmt":"2026-10-20T14:02:47","slug":"did-you-know-u-s-d-a-says-its-not-required-to-enforce-the-animal-welfare-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=782166","title":{"rendered":"MASK OFF: The USDA claims it\u2019s not required to enforce the Animal Welfare Act in lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) filed a lawsuit against the USDA in September 2024, challenging its past decisions to license three Iowa dog breeders. The ASPCA claims hundreds of dogs have cycled through these breeders as part of a puppy-laundering scheme intended to conceal their role in supplying puppies to out-of-state retailers. In response, the USDA is arguing that the agency is not required to enforce the law \u2014 stating that none of the enforcement provisions of the Animal Welfare Act are mandatory, and that decisions on enforcement are entirely at the agency\u2019s own discretion.<\/strong><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

IOWA CAPITAL DISPATCH:<\/strong> The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) filed a lawsuit against the USDA in September 2024, challenging its past decisions to license three Iowa dog breeders \u2014 Steve Kruse, Brian Lichirie and Wuanita Swedlund.<\/em><\/p>\n

The lawsuit, which is still pending, alleges the USDA has pursued an informal policy of failing to enforce the federal Animal Welfare Act. As evidence, the ASPCA cites the USDA\u2019s decision to repeatedly renew Kruse\u2019s license, despite a history of animal-welfare violations, and by licensing two of his associates, Lichirie and Swedlund.<\/em><\/p>\n

As a result, the ASPCA claims, hundreds of Kruse\u2019s dogs have cycled through Kruse\u2019s associates as part of a puppy-laundering scheme intended to conceal the role Kruse plays in supplying puppies to out-of-state retailers.<\/em><\/p>\n

More recently, the ASPCA has noted in court filings that within days of Kruse\u2019s license being canceled in September 2025, the USDA approved a license for another individual, Christine Snakenberg, at 2345 Highway 16 in West Point \u2014 the same address as Kruse\u2019s Stonehenge Kennels, which Kruse still owned at the time.<\/em><\/p>\n

All of that, the ASPCA contends, points to the USDA\u2019s informal policy of refusing to enforce the Animal Welfare Act.<\/em><\/p>\n

In response to those allegations, the USDA is arguing that the agency is not required to enforce the law \u2014 stating that none of the enforcement provisions of the Animal Welfare Act are mandatory, and that decisions on enforcement are entirely at the agency\u2019s own discretion…<\/em><\/p>\n

In court, the USDA is arguing that the ASPCA\u2019s lawsuit centers on four Iowa breeders \u2014 Kruse, Swedlund, Lichirie and Snakenberg. The first three have voluntarily surrendered their licenses or allowed them to expire, the USDA alleges, and Snakenberg fits the agency\u2019s \u201cregulatory criteria for licensure.\u201d Because of that, the USDA argues, the lawsuit should be dismissed as moot.<\/em><\/p>\n

The ASPCA\u2019s lawsuit cites the licensing of Snakenberg as evidence that the USDA\u2019s \u201congoing policy of non-enforcement persists to this day,\u201d and so the lawsuit should not be dismissed as moot. SOURCE<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

RELATED VIDEO:<\/strong><\/p>\n