Not really...in fact, your Wiki link shows that he feels differently than that.

"Sunstein's views on animal rights generated controversy when his appointment to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs by Obama was blocked by Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). Chambliss objected to the introduction of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a volume edited by Sunstein and his then-partner Martha Nussbaum. On page 11 of the introduction, during a philosophical discussion about the source of animal rights under the law, Sunstein notes that personhood need not be conferred upon an animal in order to grand it legal standing for suit. Instead, Sunstein hypothesizes, animals could be granted "the right to bring suit" while represented by an attorney. For example, under current law, if someone saw their neighbor beating a dog, they currently cannot bring suit for animal cruelty because they do not have legal standing to do so. Sunstein suggests that granting standing to animals, actionable by other parties, could decrease animal cruelty by increasing the likelihood that animal abuse will be punished. However, nowhere in the introduction does Sunstein propose doing so: the discussion on page 11 is merely an exploration of the philosophical dimensions and formal sources of animal rights."

Fish on...

Todd