Rights of wetlands shifts the people-wetlands relationship towards one recognizing the intrinsic rights and living beingness of wetlands, embodying reciprocity, kinship, and gratitude. Recognition of wetland rights occurs within the broader Rights of Nature movement, which has often been led by Indigenous Peoples and local communities from many cultural traditions. Intrinsic wetland rights centre on the right to exist and incorporate seven other rights, forming a holistic framework that enables preservation of wetland ecosystem integrity. These rights provide the basis for a wetland’s thriving existence. The eight rights are: the right to exist; their natural place in the landscape; natural and connected hydrologic regimes; natural climatic conditions; naturally occurring biodiversity; natural ecosystem processes; natural water, soil, and air quality (i.e., structural integrity and form); and regeneration and a naturally determined future. Moral and ethical responsibilities towards these rights include fostering harmonious relationships in and with wetlands, respecting interdependence of all wetland components, safeguarding and fostering conditions enabling rights of wetlands, and acting in a precautionary manner when faced with risks of harm to wetlands. Legal and policy responsibilities include acknowledging plural worldviews, recognising legal standing and political orientations to represent and defend wetland rights, providing adequate means for wetland representation and defending and advocating for wetlands, and using best available science to restore degraded wetlands and support regeneration, thereby supporting harmonious societal relationships with wetlands. Opportunities for implementation of rights of wetlands at a variety of scales (individual, community, national, and global) are explored, and training/guidance resources are referenced.

Do you really know where your last meal came from and whether it was safe to eat? Most people are not aware of the often appalling conditions at agricultural production facilities (aptly known as "factory farms"), including worker injuries and abuse, contaminated food, and environmental pollution, as well as the horrific ways in which the animals are kept, raised, and slaughtered. In the face of these concerning conditions and alarmingly frequent food recalls-including millions of pounds of contaminated meat-it would seem prudent to increase transparency at factory farms, but historically, they have operated behind a shield of secrecy due to legal exemptions and insufficient legal regulation. For years, activists, journalists, and others accessed factory farms and shared what they found with the public, so some states passed "ag-gag" statutes to silence people by preventing them from entering and exposing the conditions at the facilities. Courts have been split on whether these ag-gag statutes violate the First Amendment right to free speech. This Article discusses and analyzes the ag-gag statutes and lawsuits challenging them, including the recent-and concerning-decisions from 2024 and 2025. The Article argues that some courts have incorrectly upheld ag-gag statutes and that this is due, in part, to misapplication of judicial scrutiny under the First Amendment and, in the context of false speech, due to questionable interpretation and application of U.S. Supreme Court precedent. As states and courts continue to erode the right to free speech, the Article offers recommendations about how to protect free
speech, improve transparency in industrial animal agriculture, and ultimately break "the silence of the farms."