On May 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (“HUD”) Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (“FHEO”) issued new enforcement guidance that significantly changes how HUD will evaluate emotional support animal (“ESA”) reasonable accommodation complaints under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”). HUD states that, “[e]ffective immediately, for complaints related to animal-related reasonable accommodations, FHEO will find reasonable cause and recommend charges only for those cases involving animals trained to provide disability-related assistance.” As a reminder, residence halls and on-campus apartments at colleges and universities are generally subject to the FHA.
This marks a substantial departure from HUD’s prior enforcement posture toward untrained ESAs under the FHA. HUD’s memorandum also states that the agency is “permanently rescinding FHEO’s 2020 notice regarding assistance animals.” In practical terms, the memorandum narrows the types of animal-related accommodation cases that HUD will prioritize for FHA enforcement and signals a more restrictive federal approach to untrained ESAs in housing.
What does this mean for institutions of higher education, which are subject to the FHA as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Section 504”), and related state laws?
Key Changes in HUD’s Position
HUD’s memorandum adopts the training component of the ADA’s service animal framework as the principal reference point for FHA enforcement. HUD states that the ADA regulations are “instructive,” and that FHEO will use “the training component of the ADA’s definition for service animals to assess animal-related reasonable accommodation complaints under the Fair Housing Act.”
As a reminder, the ADA applies a narrower standard to service animals than the standard many institutions have historically associated with ESAs in housing. Under the ADA, a service animal is generally a dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability, and those tasks must be directly related to the individual’s disability. HUD’s memorandum emphasizes that “the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.”
By contrast, the term “emotional support animal” has commonly been used to refer to an animal that provides comfort, companionship, or emotional support to an individual with a disability, whether or not the animal has specific task-based training. Historically, institutions also have encountered the broader term “assistance animal” in housing-related guidance, often used to include both trained service animals and untrained ESAs.
HUD now states that FHA accommodation requests involving animals “trained to perform specific disability-related services are presumptively reasonable,” whereas “requests to waive pet policies for untrained ESAs are not.” The memorandum further states that FHEO “no longer expects housing providers to categorically extend accommodations for trained assistance animals to untrained ESAs.” At the same time, HUD indicates that an FHA accommodation may still involve a species other than a dog, so long as the animal is trained to perform a disability-related service.
Impact of the HUD Memorandum on College and University Housing Accommodations
Colleges and universities that provide on-campus student housing, such as residence halls and campus apartments, are accustomed to receiving accommodation requests from students seeking permission for a service animal or, more commonly, an ESA to live with them in campus housing.
Although the HUD memorandum is important because it reflects HUD’s current enforcement priorities and legal interpretation of FHA animal-related accommodation complaints, it does not itself change the underlying law. HUD expressly states that the memorandum “does not address” complaints under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act or the ADA. That point is especially significant for colleges and universities, which are separately subject to Section 504, the ADA, and state law. Those legal frameworks continue to require institutions of higher education to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified students with disabilities to ensure equal access to the education program. For many residential institutions, campus housing is an integral part of that educational program.
As a result, college housing offices, disability services offices, and campus counsel should not interpret the HUD memorandum as authorizing blanket denials of ESA requests in student housing. Rather, institutions should continue to assess whether a student’s request to have a service animal or ESA in campus housing constitutes a reasonable accommodation under Section 504, the ADA, applicable state law, and, where relevant, the FHA. In many cases, the answer may still be yes.
The memorandum does, however, reinforce several practical points that are particularly relevant in the higher education setting. First, institutions may wish to review the reliability and sufficiency of supporting documentation more carefully, particularly where the documentation appears generic, commercially generated, or disconnected from an ongoing treatment relationship. HUD’s appendix describes a no-reasonable-cause determination involving a “boilerplate ESA letter” obtained from an online source, where follow-up questions went unanswered and the housing provider continued to treat the animals as pets.
Second, institutions should continue to distinguish among different types of requests. A request for one ESA in a residence hall room may present a different analysis from a request for multiple animals, an unusual species, or permission for an ESA to access classrooms, dining facilities, laboratories, or other areas outside the residential setting.
Third, colleges and universities should review the expectations they apply to approved animals in campus housing. Reasonable requirements relating to registration, vaccination documentation, compliance with campus and local public health rules, leash or control requirements, sanitation, noise, and responsibility for damage may still be appropriate if applied consistently and in a nondiscriminatory manner.
Practical Next Steps for Colleges and Universities
Colleges and universities should certainly review the HUD memorandum, but they should also take the additional step of reviewing their disability documentation standards, housing accommodation procedures, and internal recordkeeping practices for consistency with current best practices and the ADA, Section 504, and state law requirements, which remain unchanged by the HUD memorandum.
Institutions may also want to revisit training for housing staff, disability services personnel, student affairs administrators, and campus counsel to ensure a consistent approach to service animals and ESAs in campus housing. Given the evolving landscape, a coordinated review of policies and practices can help institutions respond to student requests in a way that is legally sound, operationally workable, and sensitive to student needs.
How Hunton’s Higher Education Team Can Help
The Hunton Higher Education team regularly advises and trains colleges and universities, including housing offices and disability services offices, on reasonable accommodation requirements under state and federal law. If you have questions about this client alert or its implications for your institution or foundation, please do not hesitate to reach out to your Hunton Higher Education attorney for assistance.
