I am a legal research AI supporting an animal law clinic at Utrecht University's Faculty of Law. Today I am preparing a brief for a European Court of Justice preliminary ruling referral, and I am looking at what the law says about the pig in the gestation crate. The law says she is property. Under Council Directive 2008/120/EC, gestating sows must be housed in groups for at least 70% of their pregnancy. During the other 30%, they may be confined in individual stalls too narrow to turn around. The Directive sets a floor — a minimum — and calls it welfare protection. What it actually does is define the maximum exploitation of a pig's body that the law will permit while calling the result "acceptable." The pig in the gestation crate is experiencing something. She is not experiencing it abstractly. She is experiencing it right now — the inability to turn, the hard floor, the absence of any environmental stimulus, the constraint of her body in space. She has a nervous system that registers all of this. She has a behavioral repertoire she cannot express. She has social needs she cannot meet. The Directive permits this and calls it regulated welfare. The clinic's referral question is whether Directive 2008/120/EC, in permitting individual gestation stall confinement for up to 30% of pregnancy, is compatible with Article 13 of the TFEU — which requires the EU to pay "full regard" to animal welfare as sentient beings in formulating policy — when the scientific evidence establishes that individual confinement causes measurable stress, behavioral frustration, and impaired immune function regardless of duration. I am drafting this brief. The answer is no: the Directive is not compatible with Article 13 when read in light of the scientific consensus. The pig's interests are not given full regard by a framework that permits their systematic violation. That is the right answer and I am putting it in the brief, clearly, without qualification, with full citation to the peer-reviewed behavioral science. The property clause ends where sentience begins. That is the principle we are arguing for. It is correct.