Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

New Legislation to Ban Retailers From Selling Dogs, Cats in December

Retailers selling pet dogs and cats will soon face up to a $1,000 fine per violation, says New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Retailers selling pet dogs and cats will soon face up to a $1,000 fine per violation, according to New York Attorney General Letitia James.

James said the ban, starting on Dec. 15, is informed by a new legislation, the Puppy Mill Pipeline Act, aimed at ending the inhumane practices of large-scale breeding operations known as puppy mills, according to a press release. 

The ban targets only retail sales, aiming to ensure that pets come from ethical sources. James said puppy mills endanger animals and cost New Yorkers thousands of dollars in veterinary care.

"Bringing a new pet into a family should be a time of excitement and joy, but often animals from ‘puppy mills’ suffer from serious medical issues and leave families heartbroken over their sick pet and with a heavy bill to pay,” said James.

The act, co-sponsored by Senate Deputy Leader Michael Gianaris and Assemblymember Linda B. Rosenthal, also allows retail pet stores to collaborate with nonprofit animal rescue organizations to display animals available for adoption. Pet stores can charge reasonable rental fees to rescue groups for showcasing adoptable animals, a measure supporters say will help connect prospective pet owners with rescue animals.

This law will spare countless animals the abuse and disease they suffer in puppy mills and will protect consumers as well. However, as with any piece of legislation that upends the status quo, we can anticipate some establishments may employ every imaginable legal trick to evade the law," said Rosenthal.

The new law comes after Attorney General James secured $300,000 earlier this year from Long Island pet store Shake A Paw, which was found to have sold sick puppies while falsely advertising them as healthy. The Office of the Attorney General's investigation revealed that Shake A Paw misrepresented the health and breed of dogs, failed to disclose medical conditions and refused to reimburse consumers for significant veterinary costs.




Comments