al . ▁An ▁am icus ▁cur iae ▁was ▁presented ▁by ▁the ▁Texas ▁Hum ane ▁Legisl ation ▁Network ▁with ▁support ▁from ▁the ▁Hum ane ▁Society ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁ur ging ▁the ▁court ▁to ▁u ph old ▁the ▁bill . ▁The ▁bill ▁was ▁def ended ▁by ▁the ▁Texas ▁Att orney ▁General ' s ▁office . ▁On ▁ 3 1 ▁January , ▁ 2 0 1 3 ▁federal ▁district ▁judge ▁James ▁R . ▁Now lin ▁denied ▁the ▁motion ▁and ▁u ph eld ▁the ▁constitution ▁valid ity ▁of ▁the ▁bill . ▁Although ▁the ▁legisl ation ▁is ▁popular ly ▁known ▁as ▁" pu ppy ▁mill ▁bill ", ▁it ▁addresses ▁large - scale ▁bre ed ers . ▁ ▁This ▁law ▁does ▁not ▁reg ulate ▁h ob by ▁bre ed ers . ▁ ▁The ▁law ▁is ▁admin ister ed ▁by ▁the ▁Texas ▁Department ▁of ▁Lic ens ing ▁and ▁Reg ulation , ▁who ▁issued ▁rules ▁regarding ▁the ▁administration ▁of ▁the ▁program . ▁ ▁A lic ia ▁Gra ef , ▁writing ▁for ▁Care 2 , ▁has ▁described ▁the ▁r uling ▁as ▁triumph ▁of ▁pu pp ies ▁over ▁angry ▁bre ed ers . ▁O pp on ents ▁of ▁the ▁bill , ▁such ▁as ▁members ▁of ▁R PO A ▁argued ▁that ▁the ▁bill ▁wouldn ' t ▁alle vi ate ▁the ▁suffer ings ▁of ▁badly ▁treated ▁animals ▁but ▁would ▁create ▁a ▁" dog ▁Gest ap o ". ▁ ▁References ▁ ▁Category : An imal ▁w elf are ▁and ▁rights ▁legisl ation ▁in ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Category : M amm als ▁and ▁humans ▁Category :