In May of 2026, the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) released a memo addressing the hot topic of emotional support animals (ESAs).
Inspired by recent court decisions surrounding reasonable accommodation requests for disabled residents’ assistance animals, FHEO has clarified its current position on what the definition of “reasonable” is, in this context.
Effective immediately, FHEO will find reasonable cause and recommend charges only for complaints alleging discrimination for denying requests for service animals trained to provide disability-related assistance under the Fair Housing Act. Importantly, the memo does not address how FHEO will process complaints arising from protections granted under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
To support this policy decision, the memo cites Executive Order 14219, which asserts that due to limited enforcement resources, federal agencies must only enforce “the best reading of a statute.”
In the 2025 case Henderson v. Five Properties LLC, a disabled resident complained that her property management company refused to waive pet policies for an animal she claimed was necessary as an emotional support animal. The legal team cited FHEO 2020-01, which includes emotional support animals under the assistance animal umbrella. The case’s judge took issue with the applicability of both the notice and the definition in this matter, and remarked that “HUD’s notice is unpersuasive.” FHEO’s Assistant Secretary, Craig W. Trainor, agrees with that position and opines that the notice actually makes it even harder to make a decision surrounding what pet waivers are actually “reasonable.”
FHEO 2020-01 is now officially rescinded, due largely to its murky applicability.
FHEO acknowledges that individuals with disabilities may require trained service animals to provide assistance, and hereby adopts the ADA definition of a service animal. To be considered a service animal, one must be trained to do work or perform tasks for a disabled individual. The memo further dictates that “the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks…” In other words, for properties subject only to the Fair Housing Act, exempting untrained emotional support animals from pet restrictions is not a reasonable accommodation.
The memo acknowledges that residents and applicants of HUD-assisted housing remain subject to the rule exempting “animals that are used to assist, support, or provide service to persons with disabilities” from being treated as pets. The memo simply does not believe that these rules apply to private owners of unsubsidized units.
The bottom line: HUD-assisted properties that fall under the protections of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act must still allow reasonable accommodation requests for emotional support animals. All other properties, subject only to the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, need not consider an emotional support animal as a reasonable accommodation.
NCHM anticipates further clarifications and/or revisions.