Mandatory national domestic registry and physical team ID

What this component proposes

Landon's Law proposes a mandatory national recognition and registration system for qualifying domestic service-dog teams, with a physical team identification credential. This is a proposed change to federal law, not a current legal requirement. Registration would become a condition of recognition only after enactment, implementation, and an appropriate transition period.

• Use standardized national qualifications covering a disability-related need, trained tasks, and public-access competency. A qualified clinician would attest to disability-related need without publishing the person's diagnosis.
• Give owner-trained and professionally trained teams equal routes to qualification. Accreditation by a training organization would not be the sole pathway.
• Recognize qualifying existing teams through a transition process, with a practical grace period and accessible, reasonably priced assessment routes for owner-trained teams.
• Issue a physical team ID with privacy-preserving verification. Public-facing checks should confirm credential validity without disclosing diagnoses, specific tasks, or other unnecessary medical information.
• Allow remote or virtual public-access testing when the assessment can reliably establish the required competencies. Detailed testing, renewal, remediation, and appeals rules are addressed by related components.
• Provide a defined, fair implementation date before registration becomes mandatory, rather than abruptly stripping existing qualified teams of access protections.

Current federal law and proposed change

Under the current ADA public-access framework, service dogs are not required to be certified or registered, and people with disabilities may train their own service dogs. Covered entities generally may ask only the two permitted questions when the service and task are not apparent. A voluntary registration document does not itself establish ADA service-animal status. Landon's Law would require congressional action and careful coordination with other federal disability-rights laws.

Primary federal references

• U.S. Department of Justice, ADA Requirements: Service Animals
• U.S. Department of Justice, Frequently Asked Questions about Service Animals and the ADA

These sources explain general ADA public-access guidance, not every setting-specific rule. They do not endorse this legislative proposal. A full cross-statute legal analysis is still in development.

Implementation and legal questions

• Access barriers: cost, geography, disability-related limitations, testing availability, and administrative delays could exclude otherwise qualified teams.
• Privacy and security: a central or federated credential system must minimize sensitive data, support offline verification, prevent tracking, and address compromise and revocation.
• Due process: denial, expiration, errors, failed assessments, remediation, and appeals need clear procedures and interim protections.
• Legal integration: definitions, enforcement, transition, and preemption must be reconciled with the ADA, Rehabilitation Act, Air Carrier Access Act, Fair Housing Act, and applicable regulations.
• Misuse: physical credentials and verification tools must not encourage demands for medical details or become an excuse for harassment or unnecessary delays.

Questions for working teams and stakeholders

1. What benefits or harms would mandatory registration create for your working team or the teams you support?
2. What barriers might prevent an owner-trained, rural, low-income, or newly partnered team from qualifying?
3. What should a verifier be allowed to see, and what information must remain private?
4. What transition period and temporary protections would be fair for existing qualified teams?
5. Should physical credentials be mandatory, and what alternatives should exist for lost cards, accessibility needs, or system outages?
6. What evidence or experience would persuade you to support, revise, or oppose this proposal?

Feedback is welcome from owner-trained and professionally trained teams, including people who oppose mandatory registration. Please reference Component 1 in your response.

Content status: consultation summary. Detailed source-by-source legal verification remains pending. This is not final bill text, a legal opinion, or a representation that any government agency has endorsed the initiative.