Maybe “the title and rights of Mexican citizens”, as guaranteed in article 8, includes the right to cockfighting. In that case, all they need is to file the case in the name of a Mexican living in the region transferred to the USA by this treaty, who explicitly chose to remain a Mexican citizen rather than becoming a USA citizen within one year but stay in the USA.

The catch? That Mexican citizen would have to have be at least 159 years old and still living in New Mexico.

I am appalled by the thought that cockfighting is part of my “cultural heritage.”

But — and this is not to excuse the cockfighting, merely to explain why this argument has any traction at all — the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has scriptural status with much of the community here. Regardless of what it actually says.

Icy your point, however.

This post isn’t about them, however. Though it is self-evident to me that the plaintiffs in this case are at a point on that spectrum that is not morally justifiable, the point here is not whether or not the policy enacted by the legislature, forbidding cockfighting, is the correct one. It is, rather, that it is a legislative one.

Once we get rid of cockfighting and bullfighting, we can stop dog racing, horse racing, pig racing and pigeon racing.

In fact, after we close down all the factory farms and ban meat-eating, we can finally get around to prohibiting private ownership of animals – oh, I’m sorry, I mean non-human peer species.