#VSLKDFDSKLFSDJFLKDJFLKSEJFLSD

[dittolicous]

(I am so sorry for the essay I accidentally wrote in advance, I was just going to write a paragraph or two but I blacked out and woke up to what can only be described as the ramblings of the pokemon lawyer that seemingly possessed me.)

Ended up reading the entirety of catching trains in one sitting and then proceeded to binge read your tag for it too LMAO. It’s so good! And in particular, one ask caught my attention. Specifically in regards to fossil Pokémon legalities and intelligence of Pokémon and where they stand as a person standing in the court of law!

I think that the best comparison for fossil pokemon, and legalities regarding conservation work, would fall under the same category as domestic and pet animals.

Yes, they can go feral and exist in invasive pockets like boars in the American South, Feral horses and Burros in pockets of Australia and the American Midwest, The occasional "wild" fossil pokemon you can find in situations like some parts of Pokemon Snap, the SwSh DLC, and probably more I'm forgetting. But like domestic animals, they were sprung up from human intervention, and centuries of domestication means that, generally, they haven't existed in a wild state outside of a handful of cousin species since the dawn of livestock re-rearing. They won't really thrive if suddenly released in the wild most of the time because the resources that theyre wild ancestors depended on (see; plant species that only exist thanks to human cross-pollination). Sure, they could survive, but chances are they wouldn't really be able to breed back up to significant numbers unless placed in an environment that reflects their old habitats (Horses, Wild Hogs, The Feral Australian Camel population that I recently found out existed)

Now add in the fact that these fossils have been extinct millions of years. These fella's are hella cute and very much existing in a world where they only exist thanks to the desire of trainers wanting to recreate Jurassic Park but executed correctly. It would absolutly be argued that fossil pokemon should be treated as modern invention that can be categorized as a domestic animal! And like you said, an animal who has only been extinct for less than a century, who's native environment is still intact, could not be classed the same as a fossil pokemon. I feel that the conservation work around the Spix Macaw, and the legal amnesty case surrounding them regarding the government of Brazil against pet/collectors of the species in the 1990's, is a very apt comparison for what could happen with Sinnoh vs Funky Train Man and his emotional support Goth Mean girl.

And speaking of birds ( I am, so, so, so sorry for rambling so much btw, my brain just is riding the high of reading good fiction and wanting to info dump on my favorite topic, parrots and endangered animal law) legal cases regarding animals are WILD BRO.

Any one who's been around parrots ('specially greys! from personal experience) will argue that they are very very aware animals. Dr.Irene Pepperburg's work with Alex is very vindicating for us parrot owners, as she puts them up there with dolphins and chimps in terms of intelligence. They are, from a conscious point of view, around the emotional intelligence of a toddler. They, and other intelligent animals in that range, can express desires, as some semblence of questions and to a degree, comprehension of implications. Hell, Alex was proven to be able to formulate some questions and string together sentences (again, owners of Grey's who give two darns and properly pay attention to their animals can attest to this) This rising awareness in intelligence really does remind me of how pokemon interact in canon (although, not to that insane extent, but close!)

And, IRL, animal's in court cases are interesting cases. While researching a similar topic, I found the following case:

Richard Cupp, Cognitively Impaired Human, Intelligent Animals, and Legal Personhood, 69 Fla. L. Rev. 465 (2017). 

and this line in the abstract instantly came to mind when reading your legal musing's:

"For example, a human asserting to act on behalf of an intelligent animal might seek a writ of habeas corpus to demand release from a restrictive environment where less restrictive environments, such as relatively spacious sanctuaries, are available. "

Several cases have been legally fought over the right of an intelligent animal and they're right to decide where they reside with several chimps, a orangutan, an elephant, and so on. I cannot imagine what insane Phoenix Wright Orca Court trials are happening in the Pokemon world when literally almost every animal seems to be at least around the smartness we see in our most intelligence at MINIMUM.

LIKE. PEOPLE USED TO MARRY POKEMON, HOW DO YOU WORK THE LAW AROUND THAT.

Gamefreak please drop more slice of life anime shorts your fandom desperately wants to know even the most mundane details. Like what about the existance of Alakazam. And Mewtwo. Im pretty sure most psychic types are lie detectors but can also brainwash. Where do we even start to untangle this disaster of bureaucratic migraines.

ANON. ANON COME CLOSER.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH DO NOT APOLOGIZE!!!!! THIS IS BEAUTIFUL FANTASTIC INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fossil pokemon - YES THAT'S BASICALLY IT. like, they're only around cuz humans took their bones and reanimated them SOMEHOW. while in the pokeani there appears to be SOME natural fossil pokemon habitats (if i recall right sometime in the first two seasons ash and co came across kabutops and omanyte in the wild on some island and then in the bw ani, juniper sets her acheops free to live with a group in the wild) but it's all man-made in the end.

PLUS going by the work of one cara liss (i will kill her), it's possible that revived fossil pokemon might not even totally resemble what they once were!!! if it's possible to revive them with different pieces and create something that can 'technically' survive, then that means that its possible that the process of revival is adding something to the mix that enables survival/life regardless of the prior life.

so that means these guys are basically something entirely new and have no true natural habitat!

pokemon intelligence - like, they are at LEAST as intelligent as human toddlers give that they're able to communicate as well as most pokemon do, understanding battle tactics or show coordinations. so, at the minimum, they can be treated like human children when it comes to legal stuff right?

does that mean that if a couple gets a pokemon while together, but then later separates, can they go to court for visitation rights or to determine who gets the pokemon, but the pokemon can also go 'no i wanna be with so-and-so!'?

and like.... with pokemon marriage and pla, it's all but outright stated that not only did humans marry pokemon, THEY WERE ABLE TO HAVE KIDS TOGETHER. ACTUAL HONEST TO GOD KIDS. ARE THE KIDS POKEMON OR HUMAN???? DID THEY HAVE POWERS????? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THEIR BLOOD LINE????

ARE HUMANS TECHNICALLY POKEMON??????

god, i would kill for an ace attorney style pokemon game because that would LITERALLY be the FUNNIEST fucking thing ever. it'd be nothing but the orca trial times 100000000. CROSS EXAMINE THE CHATOT, WRIGHT, JUST DO IT.

with sneasler, like of course most of the researchers or conservationists would agree its best to stay with ingo, she's happy, he knows what her needs or wants are, BUT as you pointed out, SPACE to thrive is needed!

its entirely valid to claim he isn't giving what she needs to allow her species to be properly brought back into the world! sneaslers are CLIMBERS, they mostly belong in mountain ranges, with plenty of room to move and build nests! not a cramped city near an UNDERGROUND SUBWAY STATION. like, what happens if he disapears again or dies or whatever??? what then? there needs to be checks and balances and a SYSTEM in place, and can he really be the center of it all?

from an outside perspective, ingo is being very selfish! by keeping lady sneasler AND staying in the city, at his conductor job, he's forcing everyone ELSE to change THEIR lives. why does he get special treatment, why are HIS needs more important than an entire community of pokemon conservation specialists? is it right to expect people to gladly rip their lives up to come live in another country, just because he doesnt want to move? lady sneaslers habitat exists, if he truly cares and wants whats best for her, why does he not simply move to sinnoh? or at least move to a mountain area? he's basically having his cake and eating it too!

now we know all those whys, and we all think he deserves to be able to live his best life... but it puts everything in a gray area, even iF lady sneasler is technically happy and 'thriving' with him.

in addition, i think it's important to remember how, outsider perspective... ingo hording an extinct pokemon after mysteriously vanishing, along with having strong charisma and people who are willing to follow or go to bat for him... can seem a LOT like the makings of a villain team. lysander was a huge and beloved ceo and cafe owner! chairman rose was literally THE CHAIRMAN. HE BASICALLY RAN GALAR. giovanni was a gym leader!!!! lusimine WAS A POKEMON CONSERVATION SPECIALIST. LITERALLY.

just because the world views him as good at large, does not mean he is good. to an outsider, they have no more reason to trust him than they did lusimine, rose, lysander, or giovanni.

so, yeah, he kinda does need to prove he's doing the right thing! what is the right thing? who fuckin knows bruh!!!!!

i lOVE ALL OF THIS THOUGH LOVE LOVE LOVE IT ANON NEVER STOP