Eileen Day for Congress

Say what? 😨 Protecting animals = protecting people!

Election day is November 3, 2026, and we’re anticipating 25-35 new incoming legislators. That means there will be many new faces at the Capitol and new opportunities to build relationships, educate policymakers, and advocate for stronger protections for animals across Texas.

Make sure you’re registered to vote 👉https://www.votetexas.gov/

➡️While states have the power to regulate public safety through bite & dangerous dog laws, they CANNOT violate the U.S. Constitution to do it.⬅️

🇺🇸The US Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of the land.

1. 14TH AMENDMENT—The Right to Due Process

2. 4TH AMENDMENT—Protection Against Unreasonable Seizure

3. 14TH AMENDMENT—Equal Protection Under the Law

States and local governments may regulate dangerous dogs—but they must do so within the Constitution.

A. Because pets are legally treated as property, the government cannot deprive an owner of a dog or destroy their dog without "due process of law". (14TH)

B. The government cannot unreasonably seize a person’s property without lawful justification. (4TH)

C. Local laws must be applied fairly and cannot deny a person equal protection under the law. (14TH)

💪🐶 If a city seizes and holds a pet without lawful justification, or seeks to destroy that pet without a fair and legal process, it may have violated the owner’s federal constitutional rights, abused their power, and federal constitutional rights can be used to OVERRIDE the local action.

THE CHECK ON LOCAL POWER

If an owner’s constitutional rights are violated by someone acting under state or local authority, they can file a Section 1983 Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit against the city or county.

This powerful federal tool allows citizens to ask a Federal court to hold local officials personally and financially liable for overstepping their bounds, forcing local animal control agencies to respect the U.S. Constitution.

⚖️KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!

‼️CM1 GILBERT GONZALEZ HIGHLIGHTS ANIMAL SHELTER COLLABORATION‼️

Laredo, TX - District 1 Councilmember Gilbert Gonzalez shared that he met with staff at the Laredo Animal Shelter to discuss ongoing efforts to support the facility and improve care for stray animals.

Gonzalez recognized his appointee for being actively involved in collaborating with the shelter and thanked Mrs. Ancira for her continued dedication, time, and passion for helping Laredo’s stray animal population. He also encouraged residents to spay and neuter their pets to help reduce the number of stray animals in the community.

📸 : CM1 Gilbert Gonzalez

゚

⚖️A BREAKDOWN OF THE SNUGGLES CASE FILINGS⚖️

I've stayed quiet about this case (and others)—Not because I didn't have opinions. I wasn't interested in joining the internet mob. I wanted facts.

I needed the court filings, the records, and the evidence before I spoke publicly. Now we have them.

For months, I've been working behind the scenes with Jennifer Evancho as she fought to save Snuggles, while also working on other dangerous dog cases across the country.

This isn't just about one dog. It is about a system that every American should care about. This case exposes failures in dangerous-dog laws, animal-control systems, government accountability, due process, public transparency and the treatment of animals held in government custody. It's about whether GOVERNMENT FOLLOWS ITS OWN LAWS.

This isn't an isolated tragedy. And the public needs to understand exactly what is happening.

Recently, Jennifer and her BRILLIANT appellate attorney, Christina Maccio filed a Motion to Vacate and a Federal Civil Rights lawsuit.

Judging by the comments and reposts, almost nobody has actually read them AND understood them or their significance.

So let's do that. (BUCKLE UP)

1⃣MOTION TO VACATE
First, this motion was not filed in the Court of Appeals, which may be confusing because this was an appeal.

It was filed in the original lower Superior Court, as that is where her attorneys show the entire process used to sentence Snuggles to death was legally broken from beginning to end.

A. THE WRONG LEGAL PROCESS WAS USED—The case was filed under one section of Tucson's code, but tried under a different section—one with different procedures and different legal authority.

B. THE HEARING WAS CONDUCTED UNDER THE WRONG RULES—The section they conducted the hearing on didn't even authorize ordering a dog destroyed.

C. THE CITY ADMITTED THE ORIGINAL DESTRUCTION ORDER DID NOT EVEN SUPPORT DESTRUCTION—The written order relied on a section of the code that did NOT authorize destroying Snuggles. READ THAT AGAIN.

That is not a spelling mistake. That is the legal authority for taking a living animal from his family and KILLING him.

D. THE COURT CHANGED THE LEGAL BASIS AFTER JENNIFER APPEALED—Read that again. Once an appeal is filed, the court no longer has jurisdiction to change the order!

E. ARIZONA'S DANGEROUS DOG LAW WAS MISAPPLIED—Provocation is an exception and if the dog was provoked, the bite law does not apply.

F. BREED EVIDENCE WAS IMPROPERLY CONSIDERED— Arizona law specifically prohibits using breed to determine whether a dog is vicious. They covered breed and even 'bite force'! No one stopped them.

G. AN IMPROPER LEGAL STANDARD WAS APPLIED—The court required Jennifer to prove something the law never requires.

H. THE DESTRUCTION ORDERS SHOULD BE DECLARED VOID—The legal defects are so significant that the orders should have no legal effect.

Wasn't that fun? This case never should have gotten off the ground.

But this isn't just one person on a power trip going rogue. This was an entire county and city legal system weaponizing the law improperly against a citizen.

I guarantee you, when this motion to vacate was read, buttholes all over Pima County and Tucson offices were puckered.

2⃣FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS CASE
Instead of focusing on legal errors, this filing focuses on Jennifer's constitutional rights, and how they were violated.

A. ONGOING UNCONSTITUTIONAL SEIZURE—Each day that goes by is a new constitutional injury, as Snuggles continues to be held without lawful authority.

B. VIOLATION OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS—Many of the government's actions violated this right. I will spell each one out in another post.

C. VIOLATION OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS—It is a basic right to own property. Jennifer was not given her due process to defend keeping it.

D. UNREASONABLE SEIZURE UNDER THE 4TH AMENDMENT—The entire process was misapplied and mistried from the beginning. From how long they held him, to records requests, to court procedures, etc. We'll go into this more in detail on another post.

E. FINANCIAL HARM—Charged this family $16k...their entire life savings, to keep their own dog alive...and went back for more even after they had realized their mistake and filed their little switcheroo under the radar.

F. CL*******CK OF ACCOUNTABILITY—Both governments played a role in the continuing detention, but neither knew who had the authority for ending it. Cue 27 clowns getting out of a car.

G. PUBLIC RECORDS LAW—Jennifer documented repeated attempts to find out how Snuggles was doing, during a distemper outbreak, if he was confined to the same cell for 270+ days without leaving it for exercise, socialization, and relieving himself in the same cell he ate and slept in. Those records were never produced as required by Arizona law.

I am pursuing this same legal battle in Texas with the case and have taken it all the way up to the Attorney General. See a pattern yet? Stay tuned for updates on that case.

H. MUNICIPAL LIABILITY DAMAGES—The lawsuit seeks damages, stopping the euthanasia, require proof of life and welfare information, preserve evidence, stop adding fees, and hold the governments accountable for their constitutional violations.

I. DUE PROCESS—Testimony was presented through hearsay rather than direct testimony and no questioning of the witness was allowed. Can't even go into the false information the PACC Director submitted about the victim. That deserves its own post. Stay tuned.

3⃣WHAT THIS ALL MEANS

—A family dog has spent more than 9 months locked away while the government applies the wrong law, tries to cover up their mistakes, railroads the entire family, and points fingers at each other over who is responsible. It is not just one person. It is an entire system designed to fail its citizens at every turn.

—Snuggles is one story in Arizona that has received public attention. There are others. MANY others. Different states. Different agencies. Same structural problems.

—Each case has taught me something different about where the systems fail and where reform is desperately needed. That is what we change.

—If they can do it to them. They can do it to you.

4⃣WHAT IS NEXT?

—The legal process will play itself out. Jennifer will give updates as they happen. I cannot imagine an outcome other than this entire case being dismissed and Snuggles going home. Let's hope that becomes a reality.

—I will be breaking many of the issues above down over the next several days, so everyone can see why they matter, and what they could mean for the future of dangerous dog cases across the country.

—This means looking at dangerous dog laws, due process protections, animal control procedures, shelter practices, transparency, government accountability, standards of evidence, and the humane treatment of animals held in government custody.

➡️My goal in this post is not just to provide colorful commentary and understanding.

In addition to taking definitive action steps on the case level to support those efforts, I am identifying where the system is breaking down, creating purposeful meaningful reforms, and building support for legislation that protects both public safety and the constitutional rights of pet owners while ensuring animals are treated humanely throughout the legal process. You will see more evidence of these efforts in the months to come.

You all have heard me say this over and over:

Without proof, it's just hearsay...and people are only screaming into the void by complaining online.

With proof, you can prove wrongdoing, reclaim your power as a citizen, take the legal way to get justice, and effect change.

Snuggles deserves to be free. Jennifer and her family deserve justice. The city deserves a process people can trust. And every community deserves an animal welfare system that prevents these cases from happening in the first place.

More to come. ❤️🤍💙🐶⚖️💪

SAVE THE DATE: Texas Humane Network's Laws for Paws is back this October! 👏

Join us for our Texas-focused animal education symposium, bringing together advocates, attorneys, and animal professionals to explore the laws that impact animals every day.

Connect with professionals from across the state while earning continuing education hours required by your licensing or state agency. Don't miss this opportunity to expand your knowledge, strengthen your network, and increase your impact for animals across Texas.

⭐ PLUS this year features Advocacy Classes designed specifically for passionate animal advocates, offering practical knowledge and tools to help you make an even greater impact in your community.

Stay tuned for more.

THIS NEEDS TO BE SAID...
"I’m going to say something that many people in rescue will probably not agree with but idk that I care anymore.

I have come to believe euthanasia lists are one of the most harmful things we’ve normalized in animal rescue.

Not because euthanasia isn’t real. Not because those dogs don’t deserve to be seen. But because we’ve built an entire rescue culture around panic, guilt, and emotional manipulation instead of sustainable lifesaving.

Every day we’re handed a countdown of 20-30 dogs. We know exactly when a dog is supposed to die. We watch the clock. We refresh social media, check their shelterluv location. We spend hours crying over dogs we’ve never met (Molly & Glenda.) We carry the weight of their final hours as if it’s our personal responsibility to stop the inevitable.

That isn’t advocacy.

It’s trauma. This is literally insane behavior.

We’ve conditioned an entire community of animal lovers to live in a constant state of stress, anxiety, depression, grief, and moral injury. We celebrate people who sacrifice their finances, relationships, sleep, and mental health because “at least one more dog lived.”

But at what cost?

These lists don’t encourage thoughtful decisions, they encourage impulsive ones. “Well, I do have an empty crate in the spare room” (I SAY TO MYSELF!!)

People agree to foster because they can’t handle the guilt of scrolling past a face with a deadline. Families adopt out of desperation instead of compatibility. Rescues say “yes” because they feel they have no choice, not because they have the resources to provide the care that dog actually needs.

Then reality sets in.

❌The rescue has no foster.

❌No funding.

❌No trainer.

❌No decompression space.

❌No long term plan.

Dogs with significant behavioral challenges end up warehoused in boarding facilities or crates, sometimes spending 23 hours a day confined for weeks or months because there is simply nowhere else for them to go. Dogs continue to deteriorate mentally while rescues exhaust themselves trying to keep up.

Saving a dog from euthanasia should never mean condemning them to months or years of isolation, instability, or chronic stress simply because we weren’t prepared to meet their needs.

And while every individual dog matters, we also have to ask ourselves difficult questions.

1️⃣How many healthy, adoptable dogs are waiting longer because resources were diverted to emergency pulls?

2️⃣How many foster homes burned out?

3️⃣How many volunteers walked away?

4️⃣How many rescue organizations closed because they kept making decisions from a place of panic instead of capacity? (not even closed on their own accord, but actually shut down for hoarding/starving/ or even most recently …. shooting dogs)

Compassion without boundaries isn’t sustainable. It’s self destruction.

The hardest truth in rescue is this «not every dog can be saved by every rescue.»

That isn’t cruelty. It’s reality.

Real advocacy means building foster networks before emergencies happen. Raising funds before the medical crisis. Investing in behavior support. Expanding spay and neuter efforts. Supporting shelter staff. Creating systems that save thousands of dogs instead of relying on guilt to save one by one at the eleventh hour.

If our entire rescue model depends on people making desperate decisions under impossible deadlines, then the model is broken.

❌We don’t need more panic.
✅We need more planning.

❌We don’t need more guilt.
✅We need more sustainable rescue.

Because saving lives isn’t just about preventing death today, it’s about ensuring those lives are worth living tomorrow. & while some rescues believe being stuck in a cage 23.5 hours a day is a temporary set back, I do not. I will never support a rescue that hoards dogs for the sake of saying THEY SAVED THEIR LIFE.

TLDR: Hoarding ISN’T rescue and euthanasia lists are counterproductive to rescue efforts."
:
---- Author not disclosed, but this page agrees 100%

Seems legit + from a credible source. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Alternative: Stay in with the doggos, eat pawpcorn & lick-orice, drink soda pawp & watch “Marley & Me” 🐶💥🇺🇸