HLS to Close Animal Law Clinic After 2026-27 School Year, Citing Low Interest Despite Full Enrollment

Harvard Law School will close its Animal Law and Policy Clinic after the 2026-27 academic year, citing declining student interest — even as the clinic is fully enrolled with a waitlist for next year, according to four students familiar with the matter.

The decision was confirmed Tuesday at a meeting with members of the HLS Animal Law Society, one student said. But some affiliates had been informally alerted by clinic leadership earlier this semester, as early as January, according to another student.

HLS spokesperson Scott W. Young confirmed in a Thursday statement that the clinic, which currently employs one person, would sunset in June 2027.

“No other clinics will be impacted,” he wrote. “Since its creation in 2019, student enrollment in the Animal Law Clinic has never reached levels necessary to support its continuation.”

Young added that the Animal Law and Policy Program — within which the clinic operates — will continue without interruption.

The clinic, founded in 2019 as part of HLS’s Animal Law Program, allows students to work on litigation and policy projects involving farmed animals, wildlife, and animals used in research. Its work spans issues including federal regulatory enforcement, farm worker advocacy, and access to plant-based diets.

Students said they were told the closure was due to a lack of student interest. But multiple students disputed that characterization, pointing to recent enrollment trends.

Next year’s clinic is expected to run at full capacity across both semesters, with a waitlist, the four students said. Some students also said demand has grown in recent years, including among “advanced clinicians” — students who return for additional semesters of the clinic after completing it once.

Young declined to comment on enrollment for next year’s clinic.

The clinic’s closure will also eliminate a key hands-on pathway into animal law, a niche field with relatively few formal training opportunities at top law schools.

“There’s a big picture moral loss to losing an Animal Law Clinic at a flagship legal institution like Harvard Law School,” second-year law student and clinic student leadership member Akber Khan said.

Students and alumni said the clinic shaped their career trajectories, exposing them to areas of law they had not previously considered.

“It’s just sad for an already marginalized cause to lose such a powerful ally when the school has arguably traded favorably on its reputation as having this clinic,” Khan said.

Khan, who transferred from Cornell Law School in part to participate in the clinic, described the decision as a “bait and switch,” saying the program had been highlighted as a strength of the Law School during admissions.

Khan said his experience interning at Legal Impact for Chickens, an organization that advocates for farmed animals’ welfare, was highlighted during his transfer student orientation as part of a list of students’ experiences.

“The dean very proudly remarked that we’ve got someone here who wants to fight for factory farm chickens,” he said. “It hurts especially to know that my specific interests were touted as an example of Harvard students pursuing neglected causes for justice.”

Mahima Menghani, a third-year law student in her second semester with the clinic, said the program has been central to her legal education and career plans.

“I’m upset that a school with so many resources and such a big student population with such a diversity of interests is choosing to deprive us and deprive other students of this opportunity in the future,” Menghani said.

“I was looking forward to continuing a relationship with the Law School after I graduate,” she added, “and I will be really hesitant to continue that if they cut my favorite part of law school.”

Students said that without the clinic, those interested in animal law will likely have to pursue related work through environmental or labor-focused clinics, independent research, or summer internships — options they said do not fully replicate the clinic’s experience.

Shira Fischer, a third-year student who said she chose Harvard in part for its animal law offerings, described the clinic as a cornerstone of her time at the Law School.

“I feel like I actually understand a lot of the legal process through my work in the clinic,” Fischer said. “The lens that I’ve learned a lot about the law has been through the clinic.”

Faculty, alumni, and practitioners in the field also raised concerns about the broader impact of the closure.

Justin F. Marceau, an animal law professor at the University of Denver who took an animal law class during his time at HLS, said the loss of the clinic would reduce opportunities for students to gain practical experience in a developing area of law.

“I think anytime you have to close a clinic, you can surmise that there would be fewer student opportunities in that practical realm,” he said.

Former Animal Law Program director Chris Green said the clinic has played an important role in elevating the field.

“Just having Harvard’s name attached to many of these animal protection issues has also given them a bit of a greater weight or legitimacy or significance,” Green said. “That has been really helpful for the field more broadly.”

—Staff writer Uy B. Pham can be reached at [email protected] or on Signal at ubp.88. Follow him on X @uybpham.

—Staff writer Sierra R. Pape can be reached at [email protected]. Follow her on X @SierraRPape.