ESA Laws by State: 26 States Have One. Here Is What Each Actually Says

Published October 5, 2026Checked against the current regulations

If you searched for ESA laws by state, here is the answer before anything else: 26 states have a statute that deals with emotional support animals in some way, and 24 states plus the District of Columbia have none. Every state on that first list is below, with what its law actually requires and a link to the state’s own code so you can read the words yourself. The federal rule that applies everywhere, and how it differs from service dog law, is in emotional support animal vs service dog.

I should say who is writing this. I do not have an emotional support animal. I have a service dog, and I have spent twelve years reading the laws that decide where we can go. I built this table because almost every page ranking for this question is published by a company that sells ESA letters, and a company that sells letters has a reason to tell you your state requires one.

The short answer, with the numbers

Every number in this section comes from reading the statutes listed below on 5 October 2026.

• 26 states have an ESA-specific law. Some regulate who may write an ESA letter, some regulate what a landlord may ask for, some make lying about an emotional support animal an offense, and a few do all three.
• 4 states require the person writing the letter to have known you for at least 30 days: California, Arkansas, Louisiana and Montana. A fifth, Iowa, requires the letter to say whether that 30-day relationship exists, which is not the same thing. More on that below.
• 13 states attach a fine or a criminal charge to lying about an emotional support animal in housing, or to a professional writing a false letter.
• 24 states and DC have no ESA statute. In those places, the federal Fair Housing Act is the whole of the law, and that act is in force in every state on this page too.

A state having no ESA law does not mean an emotional support animal has no protection there. It means the protection comes from the federal Fair Housing Act and from the state’s general fair housing law, rather than from a statute written about ESAs. A page that tells you your state has no ESA law and stops has told you half of it.

What counts as an ESA law on this page

“ESA law” gets used loosely, and that is how wrong numbers spread. On this page a state counts if one of its statutes, in force today, does at least one of four things:

1. Who may write the letter. Licence requirements, an in-state licence, a minimum relationship, a clinical evaluation, or information the letter must contain.
2. What a landlord may ask for. Rules on documentation, including statements that online certificates and registrations are not enough.
3. A penalty for lying. A fine, a criminal charge, or a lease consequence for misrepresenting an emotional support animal, or for writing false documentation.
4. Seller notices. A duty on anyone selling an emotional support animal, vest or certificate to tell the buyer it carries no service dog rights.

A law that only punishes faking a service dog does not count here. Many states have one of those, and none of them say anything about your emotional support animal at home. Those laws are covered in service dog laws by state. Some state statutes say “assistance animal” or “support animal” rather than “emotional support animal.” Where the statute’s own definition includes an animal that provides emotional support, it counts, and I quote the definition so you can check.

Every state below links to the statute on the state’s own website. Where a state’s site would not show me the current code, I say which official document I read instead.

Every state with an ESA law, at a glance

The table is the summary. The detail, and the exceptions that matter, are state by state below.

The 30-day states, and the one that is not

Pages selling ESA letters list five “30-day states.” Four of them are right. The fifth is Iowa, and Iowa’s law says something different.

California was first. Health and Safety Code section 122318 says a health care practitioner “shall not provide documentation relating to an individual’s need for an emotional support dog” unless they hold a valid licence, are licensed where the documentation is provided, have a client-provider relationship of at least 30 days, and complete a clinical evaluation. The letter must carry the licence’s effective date, number, jurisdiction and type. Note the word dog: California’s rule is written about emotional support dogs. And it has an exception that almost every page leaves out: “A client-provider relationship with the individual of 30 days or more shall not be required for individuals who are verified to be homeless.” The full California picture, including what a landlord may ask, is in California service dog laws.

Arkansas followed California in 2023 and added a yearly review. Act 268 requires a licence in the jurisdiction where the documentation is given, a 30-day relationship, the same homeless exception, and a clinical evaluation “at least one (1) time each year.” The provider must also review the need “to renew the documentation on a yearly basis.” In other words, an Arkansas letter is meant to be renewed every year. A separate 2025 Arkansas law, Act 819, lets a private property or business owner ban an emotional support animal “Unless prohibited by the Fair Housing Act,” which in rental housing it usually is.

Louisiana adds a requirement none of the other three has. Its 2024 Support and Service Animal Integrity Act requires a Louisiana licence, or a licence in a profession with a licensure compact, a therapeutic relationship of no less than 30 days, a clinical evaluation, and that the provider “has engaged with an individual in person or remotely in at least two sessions” before issuing anything. It also makes it unlawful for an individual to “represent or attempt to represent to a third party that the individual has a disability requiring a support animal” when they do not. Section 46:1977 fines any individual, business or healthcare provider that violates the chapter up to $500 for a first offense, $1,000 for a second and $2,500 after that.

Montana tightened its rule in 2025. The letter writer must be a mental health professional “licensed to practice in this state,” with a relationship of at least 30 days and a clinical evaluation, and the letter must carry the licence number, type and effective date. Montana’s only sanction is discipline from the practitioner’s licensing board.

Iowa is the one that gets misreported. Iowa Code section 216.8C requires the professional’s written finding to include “Certification whether the provider-patient relationship has existed, in person or via telehealth, for at least thirty days.” The word that matters is whether. Iowa does not forbid a letter from someone who has known you for less than 30 days. It requires the letter to say so, along with whether the professional is familiar with you, the licence number and type, an issue date and an expiry date, and “Whether the licensee received a separate or additional fee or other form of compensation solely in exchange for making the written finding.” The finding must be made within twelve months of the start of the lease. And section 216.8C(6) says the section “does not limit the means by which a person with a disability may demonstrate” a disability or need. Iowa built a disclosure law, not a ban. That is a real difference, and it is the opposite of what you will usually read.

States that regulate who writes the letter, without a 30-day rule

Florida. Section 760.27 runs to five subsections on emotional support animals alone, and it has its own page on this site: Florida service dog laws. The short version: information from a practitioner is reliable if the practitioner “has personal knowledge of the person’s disability.” An out-of-state practitioner counts, as proof of the disability, “only if such out-of-state practitioner has provided in-person care or services to the tenant on at least one occasion.” That in-person condition is attached to proof of the disability, not to proof of the need for the animal. Florida also says plainly that a registration “obtained from the Internet is not, by itself, sufficient,” and section 817.265 makes falsifying ESA documentation a second-degree misdemeanor with 30 hours of community service.

Illinois. The Assistance Animal Integrity Act, in force since 2020, requires documentation to “be in writing,” to “be made by a person with whom the individual requesting an accommodation has a therapeutic relationship,” and to “describe the individual’s disability-related need for the assistance animal.” It then excludes, by definition, “an entity that issues a certificate, license, or similar document” without “conducting a meaningful assessment.” Illinois has no penalty section.

Indiana. Indiana Code chapter 22-9-7 is titled “Emotional Support Animals in Housing.” Someone who moves from another state may use a letter from a physician, psychiatrist, social worker or other mental health professional licensed there, “so long as the individual has an ongoing treatment relationship.” It excludes “a health service provider whose sole service to the individual is to provide a verification letter in exchange for a fee.” Section 12 makes misrepresentation a Class A infraction. Indiana’s code site displays its sections as an image rather than text, so I read these sections on screen on the Indiana General Assembly’s site.

Kentucky. KRS 383.085, as rewritten in 2019, lists who has a “therapeutic relationship”: a licensed clinical social worker, professional counselor, advanced practice registered nurse, psychologist or physician, each with a valid, unrestricted Kentucky licence and an active practice in the state. Out-of-state documentation counts if there is “an ongoing therapeutic relationship.” A provider “whose primary service is to provide documentation” for a fee is excluded. Misrepresentation, including fitting a pet with a vest or providing documentation “for the primary purpose of obtaining a fee,” carries a fine of up to $1,000. I read the 2019 Act as enacted, because the current statute page would not open.

Minnesota. Section 504B.113 lists the licensed professionals who may provide documentation, and accepts the same professions licensed in another state if there is “an existing treatment relationship.” It says:

A licensed professional does not include any person who operates primarily to provide certification for a service or support animal.

If a tenant lies, the landlord “may deny the tenant’s rental application or request.” There is no fine.

Virginia. A housing provider may ask for “reliable documentation of the disability and the disability-related need,” including from anyone with whom the person “has or has had a therapeutic relationship.” Virginia defines that relationship broadly: a mental health provider, a licensed or certified professional serving people with disabilities, a free peer support group with actual knowledge, or a caregiver or government entity with actual knowledge. The penalty points at the writer, not the tenant: a listed person who provides “fraudulent supporting documentation” commits a prohibited practice under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.

Wisconsin. A landlord may request “reliable documentation of the disability-related need for the emotional support animal from a licensed health professional,” and Wisconsin defines that as someone “licensed or certified in this state.” An out-of-state letter does not meet that definition. Wisconsin fines both sides: a tenant who misrepresents “shall forfeit not less than $500,” and so shall a licensed health professional who misrepresents a patient’s disability or need.

Maine. Maine defines an assistance animal as one “determined necessary” by “a physician, psychologist, physician associate, nurse practitioner, licensed social worker, licensed professional counselor or other licensed health professional with knowledge of the disability-related need.” Knowingly misrepresenting an animal as an assistance animal is a civil violation, and “a fine of not more than $1,000 for each occurrence may be adjudged.”

South Dakota and North Dakota wrote almost the same law. A landlord may require documentation confirming the disability and its link to the animal, and it must come from a licensed provider “who does not operate in this state solely to provide certification for service or assistance animals.” A tenant who knowingly provides fraudulent documentation can be evicted and charged a damage fee of up to $1,000. North Dakota also makes it an infraction.

Alabama. Alabama defines “reliable documentation” narrowly: “The term only includes documentation from a medical provider of the person in need of the reasonable accommodation.” Its assistance animal definition “includes an emotional support animal when the animal qualifies as a reasonable accommodation.” Creating a false document, providing one, or fitting a pet with a vest “for use in housing” carries a $500 civil penalty or a Class C misdemeanor, and a Class B misdemeanor after that.

Tennessee. Tennessee’s 2019 law defines “reliable documentation” as written documentation from a healthcare provider, a licensed or certified person serving people with disabilities, or a caregiver or reliable third party, each “with actual knowledge of an individual’s disability.” A tenant who misrepresents a need or provides false documentation is in “material noncompliance and default,” and the landlord “may terminate the tenancy and recover damages, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.” The same 2019 law made it a crime, in section 39-16-304, to knowingly misrepresent a disability or need when asking to keep the animal in rental housing, or to give a landlord documentation that falsely calls an animal a service or support animal. Since a 2023 amendment the section reads: “Misrepresentation of a service animal or support animal is a Class B misdemeanor.” A 2024 amendment added that reliable documentation “Does not include documentation provided through a website, the primary function of which is to provide a certificate, registration, license, or similar document for a service animal or support animal for a fee.” I read both amendments in the bill text published by the Tennessee General Assembly.

States with a housing rule but no rule on the letter writer

Oklahoma’s statute contains this sentence:

Supporting documentation that was acquired through purchase or exchange of funds for goods and services shall be presumed to be fraudulent supporting documentation.

The landlord “may independently verify the authenticity” of a letter, and a tenant who gets an accommodation by a false claim can be evicted, with court costs and up to $1,000 in damages.

Pennsylvania’s Assistance and Service Animal Integrity Act of 2018 defines an assistance animal to include “an emotional support animal when the animal qualifies as a reasonable accommodation.” Lying about a disability or need, or making false statements to get documentation, is a misdemeanor of the third degree. Creating a false document, providing one, or putting a vest on a pet “for use in housing” is a summary offense with a fine of up to $1,000.

Missouri requires documentation “from a qualified professional as permitted under the Fair Housing Act,” which adds no state requirement of its own, and makes knowingly misrepresenting an assistance animal a Class C misdemeanor, then Class B, plus liability for actual damages. Its definition includes an animal “that provides emotional support that alleviates one or more identified effects of a person’s disability.”

Utah makes it a Class C misdemeanor to falsely represent that an animal is “a service animal or a support animal,” or to “misrepresent a material fact to a health care provider for the purpose of obtaining documentation.” Utah defines a support animal as one that “qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under federal law.”

Wyoming defines an assistance animal to include one that “provides emotional support that alleviates one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person’s disability,” and makes knowingly misrepresenting one “for the purpose of obtaining any of the rights or privileges set forth in this article” a misdemeanor with a fine of up to $750. I read this in the 2017 Act as enrolled.

Hawaii lets a housing provider request verification “from the person’s treating health care professional, mental health professional, or social worker,” forbids asking for medical records or a diagnosis, and states that a vest or registration “commonly purchased online” does “not constitute valid verification.” There is no penalty in this statute.

South Carolina added an animal rule to its Fair Housing Law in 2019. Section 31-21-70(N) lets a landlord ask two questions “to determine whether an animal that is not a service animal should be deemed a reasonable accommodation”: whether the person has a disability that “substantially limits one or more major life activities,” and whether the person has “a disability-related need for the animal.” The landlord may request documentation, and it “shall be deemed sufficient if it establishes that an individual has a disability and that the animal in question will provide some type of disability-related assistance or emotional support.” This section sets no penalty.

West Virginia wrote emotional support into its definition. Its Fair Housing Act, now chapter 16B, article 18 of the state code, defines an assistance animal as “any service, therapy or support animal, weighing less than 150 pounds, with or without specific training or certification” that helps a person with a disability, “or provides emotional support that alleviate one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person’s disability.” A landlord may ask for “documentation, from a professional treatment provider, of the disability related need for the assistance animal,” and that documentation “is sufficient if it establishes that the assistance animal will provide some type of disability-related assistance or emotional support.” A landlord may not demand medical records, may refuse only on credible evidence of a direct threat or substantial property damage, judged on “the specific animal’s actual conduct,” and may not make the request conditional on “payment of a fee or deposit.” This section sets no penalty.

Colorado did the opposite of what you might expect

Most of the laws above were written to make ESA letters harder to fake. Colorado’s newest one was written for a different reason. House Bill 26-1045 was enacted in 2026, and its own effective-date clause points to 12 August 2026, unless a referendum petition is filed against it. Its legislative declaration says “the rescission of federal guidance” had caused confusion, and that “the purpose of this act is to restore the rescinded federal guidance by codifying it in state law.”

So in Colorado, “permitting an assistance animal in housing is presumed to be a reasonable accommodation,” and “the complete prohibition of assistance animals in housing is presumed to be discriminatory.” A landlord may still request “reasonable documentation supporting the claim of disability or disability-related need for an assistance animal,” unless the need is obvious. The act defines an emotional support animal as one “that provides solely emotional support to an individual to alleviate a symptom or an effect of a disability.” Colorado has older laws touching this subject that I did not re-read for this page, so this entry covers the 2026 act only.

States with no ESA statute, and what protects you there

As of 5 October 2026 I found no statute dealing with emotional support animals in these 24 states and the District of Columbia: Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont and Washington.

Several of them have a law against faking a service dog, and several define “emotional support animal” only to say it is not a service animal. Neither counts here. Bills have been filed in some, including New York’s Senate Bill S9086, and a bill is not a law.

If you live in one of these states, here is what you are standing on:

• The federal Fair Housing Act. It makes it unlawful to refuse “reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” That sentence is the source of every ESA housing right in the country, and the word “trained” does not appear in it.
• Your state’s general fair housing or civil rights law, which may be stronger than the federal one.
• The right to bring a case yourself. HUD changed its enforcement position on 22 May 2026, saying it “will find reasonable cause and recommend charges only for those cases involving animals trained to provide disability-related assistance.” The same guidance says “Nothing in this enforcement guidance affects the rights of parties to seek redress through a private action in court.” What that change means for an ESA letter is covered in ESA letters: what a real one contains.

Four of these states have their own full guide on this site, and each one says what the absence of an ESA law means there: Texas service dog laws, Michigan service dog laws, New York service dog laws and North Carolina service dog laws. Michigan came close: an Emotional Support Animal Act passed its House in 2022 and never became law.

Lying about an ESA: the 13 states with a fine or a charge

“How many states have made it illegal to lie” is one of the questions people type most, so here is the count, with what it covers. These 13 states attach a fine or a criminal or civil charge to lying about an emotional support animal in housing, or to writing false documentation: Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Three more attach a housing consequence without a fine: Minnesota (the landlord may deny the request), and Oklahoma and South Dakota (eviction and damages). Virginia points its penalty at the person who writes false documentation. California and Arkansas fine anyone who passes an emotional support dog off as a service dog, which is a different act from lying to a landlord.

None of this touches you if your need is real. Every one of these laws is aimed at a false claim, not at a person with a disability asking for an animal at home.

Who benefits from you believing your state requires a letter

Search this question and most of what comes back is published by companies that sell ESA letters. Some of them get the 30-day states right. The Google result for one page that ranks on the first page for this search says that “In all states, a letter from a licensed mental health professional is required to qualify an animal as an Emotional Support Animal.” No statute I read says that. Many states say nothing at all, and the federal Fair Housing Act does not require a letter in any particular form.

A company that sells letters benefits from you believing a letter is a legal requirement, and benefits more if you believe it has to come from them.

The laws actually point the other way. Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Tennessee exclude, by name or by definition, the provider whose business is issuing certificates or letters for a fee. Oklahoma presumes a bought letter is fraudulent. Iowa requires the letter to disclose whether a separate fee was paid for it. Florida, Hawaii, Iowa and Montana say an online registration is not enough on its own.

The legitimate route has not changed: a professional who actually treats you, who knows you, and who could say no. The difference between that and a purchased letter, and why the second one is worth so little after May 2026, is set out in emotional support animal requirements.

A test you can take with you

Before you trust any page about your state’s ESA law, including this one, ask three questions.

1. Does it link to the statute on your state’s own website? If it names a law and gives you no way to read it, you are being asked to take its word.
2. Does it sell anything on the same page? A letter, a registration, a vest. If it does, it has a reason to tell you that you need one.
3. Does it tell you when a state has no ESA law, and what protects you there instead? A page that only lists the strict states is selling the strict version.

If the answers are yes, no and yes, the page is probably telling you the truth. Then read the statute anyway. It is free, and it is the only version that counts.

Frequently asked questions

Which states have ESA laws?

As of 5 October 2026, 26 states have a statute dealing with emotional support animals: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The other 24 states and the District of Columbia have none, and rely on the federal Fair Housing Act and their general fair housing law.

Will ESA laws change in 2026?

They already have. HUD changed its enforcement position on 22 May 2026 and now finds cause only for animals trained to provide disability-related assistance, though the Fair Housing Act itself did not change and private lawsuits are unaffected. Colorado responded with House Bill 26-1045, which writes the withdrawn federal guidance into state law, with an effective date of 12 August 2026 under its own terms. Bills have been filed in other states, but a bill is not a law until it is enacted.

Is it illegal to say no to an emotional support animal?

In housing, a landlord who refuses a reasonable accommodation that a person with a disability needs can violate the federal Fair Housing Act, and a tenant can still sue. HUD’s May 2026 guidance means HUD itself now pursues only cases involving trained animals. Some states go further: in Colorado, once House Bill 26-1045 takes effect, a complete ban on assistance animals in housing is presumed discriminatory. Outside housing, emotional support animals have no general access right.

Do landlords actually check ESA letters?

They are allowed to, and several states say so in their statutes. Kentucky, Oklahoma and Tennessee let a landlord verify the documentation. Oklahoma presumes a purchased letter is fraudulent. Florida, Hawaii, Iowa and Montana say an online registration is not enough. A landlord still may not demand your diagnosis or medical records in states such as Florida, Hawaii and Iowa.

How many states have made it illegal to lie about an emotional support animal?

Thirteen states attach a fine or a charge to lying about an emotional support animal in housing or writing false documentation: Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Minnesota, Oklahoma and South Dakota attach housing consequences such as denial or eviction, and Virginia penalises the person who writes false documentation.

Does an ESA letter from another state work?

It depends on the state you are renting in. Wisconsin and Montana require a professional licensed in that state. California, Arkansas and Louisiana require a licence valid where the letter is provided. Florida accepts an out-of-state practitioner, for proof of the disability, only after at least one in-person visit, and Indiana, Kentucky and Minnesota require an ongoing relationship with an out-of-state provider.

I am a service dog handler, not a lawyer, and nothing here is legal advice. Laws change, and several of the states above have changed theirs since 2024. For your situation, read your state’s statute through the links below, and contact HUD, your state’s civil rights agency or a local fair housing organization.

Sources

Every source below was opened and re-read on 5 October 2026, and the Tennessee sources again on 6 October 2026.

• Alabama Legislature — Code of Alabama section 24-8A-2, definitions, and section 24-8A-5, misrepresentation
• Arkansas General Assembly — Act 268 of 2023 and Act 819 of 2025
• California Legislative Information — Health and Safety Code section 122317, section 122318 and section 122319
• Colorado General Assembly — House Bill 26-1045, signed act
• Florida Legislature — Florida Statutes section 760.27 and section 817.265
• Hawaii State Legislature — Hawaii Revised Statutes section 515-3
• Illinois General Assembly — Assistance Animal Integrity Act, 310 ILCS 120
• Indiana General Assembly — Indiana Code chapter 22-9-7, Emotional Support Animals in Housing
• Iowa Legislature — Iowa Code section 216.8B and section 216.8C
• Kentucky General Assembly — 2019 Acts chapter 145, amending KRS 383.085
• Louisiana State Legislature — R.S. 46:1974 and R.S. 46:1976 and R.S. 46:1977
• Maine Legislature — 5 M.R.S. section 4553 and 17 M.R.S. section 1314-A
• Minnesota Revisor of Statutes — Minnesota Statutes section 504B.113
• Missouri Revisor of Statutes — RSMo section 209.204
• Montana Legislature — MCA 70-24-114
• North Dakota Legislative Branch — N.D.C.C. chapter 47-16, sections 47-16-07.5 and 47-16-07.6
• Oklahoma State Courts Network — 41 O.S. section 113.2
• Pennsylvania General Assembly — Act 118 of 2018, Assistance and Service Animal Integrity Act
• South Carolina Legislature — South Carolina Code section 31-21-70, Fair Housing Law
• South Dakota Legislature — SDCL 43-32-35 and 43-32-36
• Tennessee Secretary of State — Public Chapter 236 of 2019, and Tennessee General Assembly — House Bill 165 of 2023, amending section 39-16-304, and Senate Bill 2030 of 2024, amending section 66-7-111
• Utah Legislature — Utah Code section 26B-6-805 and section 26B-6-801
• Virginia Law — Code of Virginia section 36-96.3:1
• West Virginia Legislature — West Virginia Code section 16B-18-3, definitions, and section 16B-18-5, West Virginia Fair Housing Act
• Wisconsin State Legislature — Wisconsin Statutes section 106.50(2r)(br)
• Wyoming Legislature — 2017 House Bill 114, Enrolled Act 79
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development — Enforcement guidance on assistance animals under the Fair Housing Act, 22 May 2026
• Legal Information Institute — 42 U.S.C. section 3604, the Fair Housing Act’s reasonable accommodation requirement

Every link above goes to the state’s own website or the primary document itself, so you never have to take my word for it.