<P> To imply a cause of action in these plaintiffs might entail serious consequences . It might open the use of animals in biomedical research to the hazards and vicissitudes of courtroom litigation . It may draw judges into the supervision and regulation of laboratory research . It might unleash a spate of private lawsuits that would impede advances made by medical (sic) science in the alleviation of human suffering . To risk consequences of this magnitude in the absence of clear direction from the Congress would be ill - advised . In fact, we are persuaded that Congress intended that the independence of medical (sic) research be respected and that administrative enforcement govern the Animal Welfare Act . </P> <P> In 1998, a court case was argued on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund vs Daniel Glickman (the Secretary of Agriculture), for the inhumane treatment of a primate named Barney at a Long Island Game Farm Park and Zoo . A man name Marc Jurnove had visited this park on a regular basis and noticed this primate had been neglected . He filed suit against the USDA for failing to meet the minimum standards under the AWA and his allegations were supported by investigations . The U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit Court ruled that he had standing to sue . The merits of the case were determined by a later case: Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman, 204 F. 3d 229 (2001), in which the Court rejected Jurnove's argument and upheld the validity of the USDA regulations . </P> <P> In 2012, in the case of 907 Whitehead Street, Inc. vs U.S. Secretary of Agriculture (USDA), the plaintiff challenged the jurisdiction of the USDA and its Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to regulate the Ernest Hemingway Home and Museum as an animal exhibitor . The museum is home to dozens of polydactyl cats, the progeny of a cat that Ernest Hemingway was given as a pet when he lived there during the 1930s . Following a complaint by a museum visitor, the USDA visited the museum and in October 2003, determined that the Museum was an animal exhibitor subject to regulation under the AWA because the Museum exhibited the cats for the cost of an admission fee, and the cats were used in promotional advertising . Under USDA regulations, the museum is required to obtain a USDA exhibitor's license, give each cat a tag for identification purposes, provide additional resting surfaces within their existing enclosures, and introduce one of several specified improvements required to ensure the cats remain contained to the museum's grounds . The museum challenged on several grounds the USDA's authority in the case, noting that the Hemingway cats do not have an effect on interstate commerce sufficient to merit federal regulation . As of December 2012, the case had reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which upheld earlier district court rulings . </P> <P> The USDA enforces the AWA and conducts regular inspections . Animal care will perform inspections in response to public concerns for the conditions of regulated facilities . They encourage individuals to report unregulated facilities that may require licenses or registration . Many state and local governments have animal welfare laws of their own . </P>

Who does the animal welfare act apply to