Stone Counseling & Consulting Services LLC, wordmark logo
Login
A photo of a tri-colored dog laying down with a human hand gently petting toe top of its head

  • May 26

HUD ESA Memo 2026: What Therapists Need to Know About Fair Housing and Emotional Support Animal Enforcement Changes

By Rebecca Stone, LMHC-QS of Stone Counseling & Consulting Services, LLC

Original Publish Date: May 25, 2026 (prior to having direct access to the FHEO Memo)

Updated Publish Date: May 28, 2026 (after reviewing FHEO memo and other resources)

Introduction

On May 22, 2026, the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), issued a new internal enforcement memo that changes how federal housing officials evaluate Emotional Support Animal (ESA) complaints under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). While the memo does not inherently eliminate ESA protections under federal law, it does appear to indicate a major shift in how HUD may investigate and prioritize housing discrimination complaints involving ESAs.

In addition to this new memo, HUD also recently withdrew several older fair housing guidance documents that many therapists, landlords, attorneys, and tenants had relied on for years. Together, these changes have created confusion about what still applies, what may be changing, and what therapists should know moving forward.

This article summarizes publicly available information and secondary commentary regarding recent developments and considers potential implications for therapists providing Emotional Support Animal (ESA) assessments or documentation. It is intended for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, clinical, or regulatory advice, nor should it be construed as legal authority.

The Most Important Takeaways

This article summarizes the current policy shift based on available HUD materials and related legal commentary at the time and should not be interpreted as legal advice or as a final statement of law.

Before diving into the details, it is important to understand one key point:

The Fair Housing Act itself has not been repealed or changed by Congress.

People with disabilities may still request reasonable accommodations in housing, including accommodations involving assistance animals.

What has changed is primarily how HUD plans to interpret and prioritize enforcement and how animal-related housing complaints may be investigated.

In other words, the legal landscape has not disappeared — but the way federal agencies and housing providers may apply and enforce it is changing. Interpretation of agency guidance and enforcement priorities may continue to evolve as courts and regulators respond to these changes.

What Changed?

On May 22, 2026, HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) issued a new internal memo that discusses how federal housing officials should handle animal-related housing complaints under the Fair Housing Act.

The memo appears to suggest a major shift in how HUD plans to approach emotional support animals (ESAs).

Several months before, HUD had withdrawn two important guidance documents that had shaped ESA housing practices for years:

  • FHEO Notice 2013–01, “Service Animals and Assistance Animals for People with Disabilities in Housing and HUD-Funded Programs”

  • FHEO Notice 2020–01, “Assessing a Person’s Request to Have an Animal as a Reasonable Accommodation Under the Fair Housing Act”

FHEO Notice 2013–01 explained how the Fair Housing Act applied to assistance animals in housing contexts. It clarified that assistance animals under the FHA were broader than service animals under the ADA and included emotional support animals, even when no specialized training was present. It also explained that assistance animals were not considered pets, pet fees generally could not be charged, breed or weight restrictions might need to be waived, and housing providers were required to conduct individualized review of disability-related accommodation requests.

FHEO Notice 2020–01 updated and replaced earlier guidance with a more structured framework for evaluating assistance animal requests. It was designed to help housing providers distinguish disability-related requests from potentially invalid documentation, understand what information could be requested, evaluate ESA documentation, and apply consistent decision-making standards. It also clarified points commonly relied upon in clinical practice, including that accommodation requests can be made before or after obtaining an animal, documentation may be requested when disability is not readily observable, and emotional support animals do not require task training.

These two documents had been widely used by therapists, landlords, attorneys, disability advocates, and housing investigators as the practical framework for evaluating ESA accommodation requests, guiding clinical documentation practices, informing housing provider decisions, and supporting enforcement of disability-related housing protections.

HUD stated that these guidance documents should no longer be relied upon as official agency guidance while the Department reevaluates its policies.

Together, the withdrawn guidance and the new memo suggest HUD is refocusing their animal-related enforcement efforts now, and they may be moving toward more official changes regarding ESA accommodations under federal housing law in the future.

Understanding the Different Animal Definitions

One reason this issue is confusing is because different federal laws use different definitions for disability-related animals.

Understanding those differences helps explain why HUD’s new position matters.

Service Animals Under the ADA

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a service animal is usually a dog, or miniature horse in limited circumstances, that has been individually trained to perform specific tasks related to a person’s disability.

Examples include dogs trained to:

  • guide individuals who are blind,

  • alert individuals who are deaf,

  • interrupt psychiatric episodes,

  • retrieve medication,

  • detect seizures,

  • or assist with mobility impairments.

Under ADA rules, emotional comfort or companionship alone does not count as trained disability-related work. This means untrained emotional support animals are not considered service animals under the ADA.

Assistance Animals Under Prior HUD Guidance

Under older HUD guidance, the Fair Housing Act used a broader category called “assistance animals.”

This category included both:

  • trained service animals, and

  • emotional support animals.

Under prior guidance, an assistance animal could:

  • do work,

  • perform tasks,

  • provide assistance, or

  • provide emotional support that alleviates symptoms or effects of a person’s disability.

Importantly, HUD guidance stated that assistance animals:

  • were not treated as pets,

  • did not require formal training, and

  • could include animals providing emotional support related to a disability.

This broader definition is central to how ESA housing accommodations developed under the FHA.

Emotional Support Animals (ESAs)

An emotional support animal (ESA) is generally understood as almost any type of domestic animal that provides:

  • comfort,

  • emotional stabilization,

  • anxiety reduction, and/or

  • psychiatric support related to a disability.

Unlike ADA service animals, ESAs historically did not need specialized task training to qualify for Fair Housing Act accommodations under HUD guidance.

Under previous HUD guidance:

  • ESAs were considered “assistance animals,” not pets,

  • Housing providers generally had to accommodate them,

  • Pet fees and breed restrictions often could not be applied, and

  • Tenants could support requests with documentation from a licensed therapist when disabilities were not readily observable.

HUD’s New Position on ESAs

While the Fair Housing Act (FHA) still recognizes assistance animals in housing contexts, the memo indicates a shift in how HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) may evaluate and prioritize complaints involving different types of animals.

The memo appears to indicate that HUD intends to rely more heavily on Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) service animal standards as a reference point in assessing housing-related animal complaints. Because HUD’s own regulations have not been significantly updated in many years, ADA definitions are described as “instructive” for enforcement purposes.

Under the ADA, service animals must be individually trained to perform specific tasks directly related to a person’s disability. Emotional support, comfort, companionship, or general well-being alone do not qualify as disability-related work or tasks under this framework.

The memo indicates that housing providers may not be expected to categorically extend the same accommodation framework used for trained assistance animals to untrained ESAs.

This reflects a distinction in how trained service animals and untrained emotional support animals may be treated in enforcement contexts, even though both have historically been discussed under the broader category of assistance animals in prior HUD guidance.

The memo provides examples of tasks that may qualify as trained assistance work, including:

  • guiding someone who is blind or who has low vision,

  • alerting someone who is deaf or hard of hearing,

  • helping during seizures,

  • retrieving items,

  • providing physical support and assisting with balance and stability, and

  • helping individuals with psychiatric and neurological disabilities through trained tasks.

According to the memo, HUD enforcement priorities may increasingly focus on cases involving trained assistance animals, while ESA-related complaints involving untrained animals may receive different levels of attention or review depending on the circumstances.

The memo also states that individuals retain the right to pursue private litigation under the Fair Housing Act, even if HUD does not pursue administrative enforcement.

Why This Is Happening

HUD’s recent actions and the May 2026 enforcement memo point to several overlapping reasons for why the agency is changing how it approaches Emotional Support Animal (ESA) cases under the Fair Housing Act.

First, HUD references concerns regarding ESA documentation which include:

  • online ESA “letter mills,”

  • weak or insufficient clinical assessments,

  • fraudulent or questionable documentation practices,

  • inconsistent standards across providers and jurisdictions, and

  • misuse of housing accommodation processes.

These concerns are not new and have been discussed for years by housing providers, therapists, attorneys, and disability advocates. At the same time, disability advocates continue to emphasize that tighter restrictions on ESAs may have unintended consequences for individuals with psychiatric disabilities who rely on emotional support animals as part of symptom management.

In addition to these practical concerns, HUD’s reasoning also appears tied to a broader legal and administrative issue: the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The APA governs how federal agencies create, change, or formalize rules.

The memo suggests concern that earlier ESA guidance may have been treated as effectively binding in practice, even though they were never adopted through formal notice-and-comment rulemaking. In simpler terms, HUD appears to be suggesting that prior guidance may have gone beyond simply explaining the law and may have operated more like unofficial regulations.

As a result, the agency is indicating a shift toward replacing prior guidance-based standards with more formal rulemaking. The memo states that HUD intends to move toward updated regulations for assistance animals through a public notice-and-comment process in the future.

Finally, HUD states that it aims to align its future approach more closely with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) service animal standards where possible, particularly the emphasis on task training as a defining feature of service animals.

Together, these factors help explain why HUD is narrowing reliance on older ESA guidance and rethinking how emotional support animal accommodations are evaluated and enforced under the Fair Housing Act.

Why the Withdrawal of Older Guidance Matters

For years, the withdrawn HUD guidance documents served as the practical framework for:

  • evaluating ESA accommodation requests,

  • guiding clinical documentation practices,

  • informing housing provider decisions, and

  • supporting enforcement of disability-related housing protections.

Without those documents, there may now be more inconsistency in how ESA requests are handled.

Different landlords, attorneys, investigators, and potentially courts may interpret or apply ESA-related accommodations differently moving forward.

This means therapists and clients may encounter:

  • stricter review standards,

  • more requests for documentation and/or verification of letter authenticity,

  • more accommodation denials,

  • changes to how complaints are investigated or resolved, and

  • less consistency in how standards are applied across jurisdictions.

What Has NOT Changed

Even with these changes, several important things remain true at this time:

  • Congress has not repealed the Fair Housing Act,

  • ESA accommodations have not been automatically eliminated or prohibited under the Fair Housing Act,

  • individuals with disabilities may still request reasonable accommodations, and

  • disability protections in housing still exist under federal law.

Individuals with psychiatric disabilities may still request reasonable accommodations in housing, and many state laws may have protections beyond HUD’s current enforcement position.

HUD’s public-facing website also still states that people with disabilities may request assistance animals as housing accommodations.* (*Note: The specific webpage that stated this, “Assistance Animals,” became inaccessible via HUD's website between 5/25/2026 and 5/28/2026.)

At this time, the main changes appear to involve interpretation and enforcement practices rather than the underlying statutory law itself.

What This Means for Existing ESA Letters

One of the biggest concerns is whether current ESA holders will lose housing protections.

As of now and based on current understanding:

  • existing ESA letters are not automatically invalid or void,

  • approved accommodations are not instantly canceled, and

  • landlords generally cannot evict solely due to changes in HUD guidance.

However, tenants may now face:

  • increased scrutiny at lease renewals,

  • requests for updated clinical documentation,

  • more accommodation denials,

  • greater challenges to the source and legitimacy of ESA assessments and accommodation requests.

Stronger documentation tends to be most effective when it reflects that an individual has:

  • a documented disability,

  • a clear functional impairment,

  • a disability-related need for the animal, and

  • an established clinical relationship.

The memo may lead to increased scrutiny of ESA documentation in some enforcement or housing contexts. Weak or transactional ESA letters may be more likely to be questioned, so real therapist-client contact, legitimate assessment, and effective documentation are even more important now.

What Happens to HUD ESA Discrimination Complaints?

HUD is shifting how it handles complaints involving emotional support animals to focus more on trained animals.

For HUD complaints regarding untrained animals, this could potentially result in:

  • slower or reduced investigation activity,

  • fewer ESA-related enforcement actions, and

  • dismissal due to narrowed enforcement.

Despite this, individuals may still pursue:

  • court action under the Fair Housing Act,

  • state fair housing complaints,

  • state disability protections, and

  • legal aid or advocacy support.

The federal administrative process is only one possible pathway for enforcement.

What This Means for Therapists

Therapists providing ESA assessments and documentation may increasingly encounter:

  • increased requests for documentation verification,

  • more detailed landlord inquiries,

  • closer review of ESA letters or forms, and

  • greater pressure to justify “necessity.”

Therapists providing ESA assessments and documentation should make sure they are operating within their scope of practice and have appropriate:

  • training,

  • knowledge,

  • experience, and

  • understanding of disability-related accommodations.

As scrutiny increases, therapists should be prepared to support their clinical reasoning and demonstrate competency in this area of practice.

While therapists are legally and ethically expected to only disclose only the minimum necessary information to confirm that a disability and disability-related need exist for an ESA, therapists may face increased requests to more clearly confirm this. Letters that simply say a client “benefits from” an animal without confirming disability and disability-related need may become more vulnerable to challenge.

Therapists using generic templates, high-volume ESA services, or very limited assessments may face more scrutiny than providers conducting individualized assessments within legitimate therapeutic relationships.

Release of Information and Disclosures

Therapists should also work collaboratively and transparently with clients when discussing ESA documentation and housing requests. This includes helping clients understand what information may be disclosed to housing providers, what information can often remain private, and the possible consequences of disclosure decisions. For example, clients may not fully realize that requesting a housing accommodation may lead to increased scrutiny, additional documentation requests, housing disputes, or the sharing of relevant mental health or disability-related information necessary to evaluate the accommodation request with housing staff and other parties involved in the review process.

It is also important to discuss the role of the client’s signed Release of Information (ROI) form in this process. Under HIPAA, therapists generally cannot disclose protected health information to a landlord, housing authority, or other third party without the client’s explicit written authorization. When a client signs an ROI for an ESA-related request, they are authorizing the clinician to share specific information with identified third parties, which may include property managers, housing administrators, or legal representatives involved in the accommodation review. Clients should understand that once information is disclosed under a valid authorization to non-covered entity, HIPAA no longer applies to the receiving party’s use or disclosure of the information, although other privacy laws, contracts, or regulations may still apply.

In situations where housing providers challenge or scrutinize ESA documentation, the process may require an ongoing collaborative approach between the therapist and the client. This includes discussing what information the client is comfortable disclosing as part of the accommodation request, what level of detail is necessary to support the request, and how different disclosure choices may impact privacy, housing outcomes, and the likelihood of approval or further review.

Therapists should help clients make informed decisions about whether and how much information to authorize for release, while still protecting client privacy and limiting disclosures to only what is reasonably necessary to support the accommodation request.

Future Risk: Could ESA Protections Change Further?

They could, particularly given that the FHEO memo suggests potential future rulemaking or policy changes.

A useful comparison is air travel policy changes. In 2021, the U.S. Department of Transportation updated its rules under the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). Prior to the 2021 final rule, ESAs were included under the service animal definition and thereby airlines were required to accommodate them. Now the ACAA defines service animals only as a dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability. With that change, animals which previously flew as ESA accommodations are now treated as pets rather than disability-related accommodations.

Housing law has not undergone a similar formal regulatory change, but this example illustrates how federal interpretation can shift over time.

At this point:

  • ESAs are still recognized under current Fair Housing Act guidance, and

  • No federal statute has eliminated ESA-related housing protections, but

  • Future changes could still happen through updated federal guidance or court decisions.

For therapists, the key point is that ESA documentation remains relevant today, but the regulatory environment is not static and may evolve over time, sometimes faster than expected.

Bottom Line for Therapists

The landscape around emotional support animals is changing quickly.

Therapists do not necessarily need to stop conducting ESA assessments and providing documentation when clinically appropriate, but therapists involved in this area should approach these assessments more carefully than before.

That includes focusing on:

  • ensuring clients understand that ESA accommodations for housing cannot be guaranteed, even with an ESA letter,

  • having legitimate assessment relationship and/or any ongoing treatment relationships,

  • conducting adequate individualized assessments including disability-related analysis,

  • having strong clinical and supporting documentation,

  • clear, well-documented clinical reasoning, and

  • competency in accommodation-related assessments.

The Fair Housing Act still exists, but the framework HUD used for many years to interpret ESA accommodations is changing significantly.

Future court decisions, state laws, federal enforcement policies, and possible HUD rulemaking will likely shape how ESA protections evolve moving forward.

Resources

Primary Federal Resources

Secondary Legal and Policy Analysis, News Reporting, Advocacy, and Commentary Resources

Disclaimer

This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, clinical, or regulatory advice. It should not be relied upon as a source of legal authority or as a substitute for consultation with qualified legal counsel, licensing boards, or relevant regulatory agencies.

The information contained herein may not reflect the most current developments and may not be complete or fully accurate in all respects. Laws, regulations, agency interpretations, and enforcement policies involving Emotional Support Animals (ESAs) and housing accommodations may change over time and may vary by jurisdiction or individual circumstances.

No professional relationship is created by reading or using this material. Readers should independently verify all information and seek professional guidance before making decisions based on this content.

Ready to get started with learning practical information you can use?

Grab the FREE ESA Jumpstart Guide 5-day email series to get essential ESA information delivered straight to your inbox!

Get the FREE ESA Jumpstart Guide

Whether you're new to ESA requests or want to tighten your current process, our Jumpstart Guide gives you the basic information you need to know.

Are you ready to elevate your ESA expertise and prepare yourself and your practice to offer ESA assessment services right now?

Sign up to get instant access to our full training, From "Oh No!" to "Yes, I Can!": Responding to and Evaluating Emotional Support Animal Requests.

I want comprehensive ESA training!

Wanting to learn more? Looking for something specific?

Share what you'd like to learn next here!

About Rebecca Stone, LMHC-QS

Rebecca Stone, LMHC-QS, is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor, Qualified Supervisor, and owner of Stone Counseling & Consulting Services, LLC, a private practice based in Florida. With over a decade of experience in clinical therapy and a strong background in business and office management, Rebecca blends compassionate care with operational expertise. She is passionate about supporting individuals on their mental health journey—and empowering fellow professionals through supervision, consultation, training and education, and practical tools to grow thriving practices.

0 comments

Joinor login to leave a comment