K9 NIGHT WATCH Report a refusal 988 press 1

México

The federal disability statute defines the right in absolute terms and prohibits any restriction on it; since December 2023 the anti-discrimination law makes refusing a service animal an act of discrimination in its own right. The hinge is the word certificados — Mexican law recognises the animal through its certification, which is the opposite of the American rule and the reason a program certificate matters here.

Lo que cuesta negar un perro de asistencia — penalties →

The federal right of access Ley General para la Inclusión de las Personas con Discapacidad, arts. 2 fr. XXVI, 16 fr. III, 17 fr. II (última reforma DOF 14-06-2024)

“XXVI. Perro guía o animal de servicio. Son aquellos que han sido certificados para el acompañamiento, conducción y auxilio de personas con discapacidad.”

Guide dog or service animal: those that have been certified for the accompaniment, guidance and assistance of persons with disabilities.

LGIPD, artículo 2, fracción XXVI

“III. Promoverá que las personas con discapacidad que tengan como apoyo para la realización de sus actividades cotidianas, un perro guía o animal de servicio, tengan derecho a que éstos accedan y permanezcan con ellos en todos los espacios en donde se desenvuelvan. Asimismo, queda prohibido cualquier restricción mediante la que se impida el ejercicio de este derecho.”

Persons with disabilities who rely on a guide dog or service animal for their daily activities have the right for the animal to access and remain with them in every space in which they go about their lives. Any restriction that impedes the exercise of this right is prohibited.

LGIPD, artículo 16, fracción III
  • “Todos los espacios” — every space. The statute does not list settings. It states a general right and bans any restriction on it.
  • Certification is the gate. The definition is of an animal that has been certified. Carry the program certificate; in Mexico it is the thing the law looks for.
  • Accessibility planning must account for service animals — article 17 lists “perros guía o animal de servicio” among the supports public infrastructure must accommodate.
Refusing a service animal is discrimination Ley Federal para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación, art. 9 fr. XXII Quáter (adicionada DOF 04-12-2023)

“XXII Quáter. Impedir, negar, restringir o condicionar el acceso de las personas con discapacidad a establecimientos públicos con personas o animales de apoyo o asistencia, de conformidad con lo establecido en la Ley General para la Inclusión de las Personas con Discapacidad.”

To impede, deny, restrict or condition the access of persons with disabilities to public establishments with support or assistance persons or animals, as provided in the General Law for the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities.

LFPED, artículo 9, fracción XXII Quáter
  • Four verbs. Impede, deny, restrict, condition. Imposing a fee or a special entrance is “conditioning” access and falls inside the text.
  • Enforced by CONAPRED, the Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación, which takes complaints against private businesses as well as public bodies.
  • Added in December 2023. Many businesses have not caught up. The citation is the argument.
Flying within and from México Ley de Aviación Civil, art. 47 Bis fr. I y art. 47 Bis 1

“I. Las personas pasajeras con alguna discapacidad tienen derecho a ser transportados sin ningún tipo de discriminación por las personas concesionarias, asignatarias o permisionarias … No se pueden establecer condiciones ni aplicar cargos adicionales para permitir el abordaje de personas con discapacidad.”

Passengers with a disability have the right to be transported without any form of discrimination … No conditions may be set, nor additional charges applied, to permit the boarding of persons with disabilities.

Ley de Aviación Civil, artículo 47 Bis, fracción I
  • The statute does not name dogs. It guarantees non-discriminatory carriage and assistive devices (art. 47 Bis 1); the cabin rules for service animals sit in the technical-administrative provisions issued by the Agencia Federal de Aviación Civil and in each carrier’s policy. Confirm with the carrier in writing before booking.
  • On a Mexican carrier flying to or from a US airport, 14 CFR Part 382 applies to that flight as well — see international air.
  • Complaints: AFAC for the carrier’s regulatory obligations; PROFECO for consumer treatment; CONAPRED for discrimination.
The constitutional floor Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, art. 1°, quinto párrafo (últimas reformas DOF 02-06-2026)

“Queda prohibida toda discriminación motivada por origen étnico o nacional, el género, la edad, las discapacidades, la condición social, las condiciones de salud, la religión, las opiniones, las preferencias sexuales, el estado civil o cualquier otra que atente contra la dignidad humana y tenga por objeto anular o menoscabar los derechos y libertades de las personas.”

All discrimination motivated by ethnic or national origin, gender, age, disabilities, social condition, health conditions, religion, opinions, sexual preferences, marital status or any other that offends human dignity and aims to nullify or impair the rights and freedoms of persons is prohibited.

CPEUM, artículo 1°

Disability is named in the Constitution itself, and Mexico ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2007; under article 1° treaty rights sit at constitutional rank. Every statute below implements this clause.

Shops, restaurants, hotels — consumer law and PROFECO fines Ley Federal de Protección al Consumidor, arts. 58, 128, 128 Bis

“Los proveedores de bienes y servicios que ofrezcan éstos al público en general, no podrán establecer preferencias o discriminación alguna respecto a los solicitantes del servicio, tales como selección de clientela, condicionamiento del consumo, reserva del derecho de admisión, exclusión a personas con discapacidad y otras prácticas similares, salvo por causas que afecten la seguridad o tranquilidad del establecimiento … Dichos proveedores en ningún caso podrán aplicar o cobrar tarifas superiores a las autorizadas o registradas para la clientela en general …”

Providers offering goods or services to the public may not set preferences or any discrimination toward applicants for the service — selection of clientele, conditioning of consumption, reservation of the right of admission, exclusion of persons with disabilities and similar practices — nor charge them higher rates than the general clientele.

LFPC, artículo 58
  • “Reserva del derecho de admisión” is named and barred. The sign on the door does not override this article.
  • PROFECO fines: infractions of art. 58 carry a fine of $1,093.02 to $4,274,960.73 MXN (art. 128, amounts updated DOF 23-12-2025); in particularly serious cases, closure of up to 90 days and a fine of $228,266.96 to $6,391,474.56 MXN (art. 128 Bis).
  • File with PROFECO for the consumer violation and with CONAPRED for the discrimination — they are independent proceedings.
At work Ley Federal del Trabajo, arts. 3°, 133 fr. I

“No podrán establecerse condiciones que impliquen discriminación entre los trabajadores por motivo de origen étnico o nacional, género, edad, discapacidad, condición social, condiciones de salud …” — and employers are forbidden to “negarse a aceptar trabajadores por razón de … discapacidad … o cualquier otro criterio que pueda dar lugar a un acto discriminatorio.”

LFT, artículos 3° (reformado DOF 15-01-2026) y 133 fr. I

Mexican labour law does not contain a service-dog clause. A dog at work is argued as a reasonable adjustment under the general prohibition above together with LGIPD art. 16 fr. III, and enforced through the labour tribunals and CONAPRED. Ask in writing.

Nuevo León — the state statute Ley para la Protección de los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad del Estado de Nuevo León, arts. 2 fr. XXVI, 44 bis, 44 bis 1, 44 bis 2

“Perro de asistencia: aquel que habiendo pasado pruebas de selección física, genética y sanitaria, ha concluido su adiestramiento en centros especializados reconocidos, y adquirido las aptitudes y destrezas necesarias para la compañía, conducción y auxilio de personas con discapacidad, debiendo estar acreditados e identificados de la forma establecida en esta Ley.”

Artículo 2, fracción XXVI (adicionada P.O. 24-12-2008)

“Se reconoce de interés público, que toda persona con discapacidad pueda disponer de un perro de asistencia; igualmente se reconoce su derecho al acceso, recorridos y permanencia junto con éste, en todos los lugares, locales y demás espacios de uso público, así como su viaje en transportes públicos, en uso de su derecho de libre tránsito, en condiciones de igualdad con el resto de los habitantes del Estado. El acceso del perro de asistencia a los lugares con pago de entrada o de peaje que precisa la Ley no implicará pago adicional, salvo que su movilización constituya la prestación de un servicio agregado.”

Artículo 44 bis
  • Status for life. Once recognised, the dog’s status continues for its lifetime unless a cause under art. 44 bis 7 arises (art. 44 bis 1).
  • Enumerated free-access places (art. 44 bis 2): open-air recreation, parks and amusement complexes; venues for public spectacles and recreation; care homes, rehabilitation centres and similar, public or private; public buildings not otherwise restricted; and the categories that follow in the article.
  • Accreditation is the gate here too — trained “en centros especializados reconocidos,” accredited and identified under the Law. The program certificate is what this statute expects to see.
  • Other states carry their own versions; Ciudad de México’s integration law is the other major one.
Bringing the dog into México SENASICA / SADER import requirements

Entry of dogs is governed by SENASICA, the federal animal-health agency under SADER. For dogs from the United States and Canada the requirements are comparatively light and are checked at the port of entry; from elsewhere they are stricter. Requirements change; confirm with SENASICA before travel, and separately confirm the US re-entry rules, which since August 2024 are the harder half of the trip.

Sources

Peer-reviewed research 14

01Pigeon WR, Campbell CE, Possemato K, Ouimette P. Longitudinal relationships of insomnia, nightmares, and PTSD severity in recent combat veterans. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 2013;75:546–50. PMID 24290044.

02Don Richardson J, King L, St Cyr K, Shnaider P, Roth ML, Ketcheson F, Balderson K, Elhai JD. Depression and the relationship between sleep disturbances, nightmares, and suicidal ideation in treatment-seeking Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans. BMC Psychiatry 2018;18:204. PMID 29921268.

03Pruiksma KE, Slavish DC, Taylor DJ, Dietch JR, Tyler H, Dolan M, Bryan AO, Bryan CJ. Nightmares and insomnia in the US National Guard: mental and physical health correlates. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 2021;28:238–249. PMID 32495239.

04Leighton SC, Rodriguez KE, Jensen CL, MacLean EL, Davis LW, Ashbeck EL, Bedrick EJ, O’Haire ME. Service dogs for veterans and military members with posttraumatic stress disorder: a nonrandomized controlled trial. JAMA Network Open 2024;7:e2414686. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.14686. PMID 38833250.

05Margolies SO, Rybarczyk B, Vrana SR, Leszczyszyn DJ, Lynch J. Efficacy of a cognitive-behavioral treatment for insomnia and nightmares in Afghanistan and Iraq veterans with PTSD. Journal of Clinical Psychology 2013;69:1026–42. PMID 23629959.

06Rodriguez KE, LaFollette MR, Hediger K, Ogata N, O’Haire ME. Defining the PTSD service dog intervention: perceived importance, usage, and symptom specificity of psychiatric service dogs for military veterans. Frontiers in Psychology 2020;11. PMID 32849004.

07Jensen CL, Rodriguez KE, MacLean EL, Abdul Wahab AH, Sabbaghi A, O’Haire ME. Characterizing veteran and PTSD service dog teams: exploring potential mechanisms of symptom change and canine predictors of efficacy. PLoS ONE 2022;17. PMID 35895599.

08Bristol S, Leighton SC, Schwichtenberg AJ, Campbell RL, Ashbeck EL, Taylor DJ, Bedrick EJ, O’Haire ME. The influence of service dog partnerships on perceived and objective sleep quality for military veterans with PTSD. Frontiers in Sleep 2024. doi:10.3389/frsle.2024.1432919.

15U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. How Common is PTSD in Veterans? Lifetime PTSD 29% among OIF/OEF veterans; 7% among all veterans; 6% general population.

16Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Disaster Technical Assistance Center. First Responders: Behavioral Health Concerns, Emergency Response, and Trauma. Supplemental Research Bulletin, May 2018. An estimated 30% of first responders develop behavioral health conditions including depression and PTSD, versus 20% in the general population.

17Carleton RN, Afifi TO, Turner S, Taillieu T, et al. Mental disorder symptoms among public safety personnel in Canada. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 2018. PMID 28845686. n = 5,813; 15.1% screened positive for one disorder and 26.7% for more than one.

18Zamorski MA, Bennett RE, Rusu C, Weeks M. Prevalence of past-year mental disorders in the Canadian Armed Forces, 2002–2013. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 2016. PMID 27270739. Past-year PTSD 5.3% in 2013; adjusted odds ratio 2.1 versus 2002.

19Medina-Mora ME, Genis-Mendoza AD, Villatoro Velázquez JA, Bustos-Gamiño M, et al. The prevalence of symptomatology and risk factors in mental health in Mexico: the 2016–17 ENCODAT cohort. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2023. PMID 36833803. n = 56,877; post-traumatic stress symptoms 5.7%.

20Meza Peña C, Bravo-Garza AP, Loredo-Villa MA. Después del enfrentamiento: estrés en policías de zona rural del noreste de México. URVIO, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios de Seguridad 2025. doi:10.17141/urvio.43.2025.6460. n = 112 police and civil-protection personnel, rural Nuevo León; stress, anxiety, depression and burnout measured with the DASS.

United States — law and penalties 8

09Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities, 28 CFR §§ 36.104, 36.302(c); Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services, 28 CFR §§ 35.104, 35.136. Text as rendered by the electronic CFR, issue date September 30, 2026.

10Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel, 14 CFR §§ 382.3, 382.72, 382.74–382.80 (Doc. No. DOT-OST-2018-0068, 85 FR 79774, Dec. 10, 2020); Transportation Services for Individuals with Disabilities, 49 CFR § 37.167; Fair Housing Act regulations, 24 CFR §§ 100.202, 100.204; VA service dog benefits, 38 CFR § 17.148 (77 FR 54381, Sept. 5, 2012).

11Puppies Assisting Wounded Servicemembers for Veterans Therapy Act, Pub. L. No. 117-37, 135 Stat. 329 (Aug. 25, 2021), §§ 2–3, adding 38 U.S.C. § 1714(e)–(f).

13U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. Notification of Withdrawal of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Guidance Documents, Docket No. FR-6571-N-01, 91 Fed. Reg. 17291 (Apr. 6, 2026) (effective date of withdrawal September 17, 2025).

14Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., including § 12112(b)(5)(A); Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).

3128 CFR 85.5, Civil Monetary Penalties Inflation Adjustment table (DOJ), current amounts for 42 USC 12188(b)(2)(C) (ADA Title III: $118,225 first violation; $236,451 subsequent) and 42 USC 3614(d)(1)(C) (Fair Housing Act: $131,308; $262,614). 28 CFR 36.504(a)(3).

3224 CFR 180.671, assessing civil penalties for Fair Housing Act cases before a HUD administrative law judge: $26,262; $65,653; $131,308. 42 USC 3613 (civil actions; damages and attorney’s fees).

3314 CFR 383.2 (89 FR 106292, Dec. 30, 2024), civil penalty amounts under 49 USC 46301: general $75,000 per violation; $17,062 for small businesses and individuals under 49 USC 41705.

Canada 6

21Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Regulations, SOR/2019-244, ss. 1, 51 (Canada). Text from the Justice Laws Website.

22Guide Dog and Service Dog Act, S.B.C. 2015, c. 17, ss. 1–6.1 (British Columbia). Text from BC Laws.

23Integrated Accessibility Standards, O. Reg. 191/11, ss. 80.45(4), 80.47 (Ontario), under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005. Text from Ontario e-Laws, currency date September 30, 2026.

34Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, s. 53(2)(e) and (3); Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 10, s. 177(1)(b); Guide Dog and Service Dog Act, S.B.C. 2015, c. 17, s. 8.

37Service Dogs Act, S.A. 2007, c. S-7.5, s. 6 (Alberta): fine not exceeding $3,000 for a discriminatory practice under s. 3; $300 for falsely claiming the Act’s benefit.

38Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, s. 45.2; Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, c. 11, s. 37; Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, RLRQ c. C-12, s. 49. Cited by section; figures to be quoted from the statutes.

41Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, ss. 3(1), 5, 6. Service Dogs Act, S.A. 2007, c. S-7.5, ss. 1, 3, 4, 6 (Alberta King’s Printer). Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, RLRQ c. C-12; The Service Animals Protection Act, C.C.S.M. c. S90; Service Dog Act, S.N.S. 2016, c. 4; Service Animal Act, S.N.L. 2012, c. S-13.2 — cited.

42Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, ss. 10(1) (“disability”), 45.2(1); Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, c. 11, s. 37(3); Blind Persons’ Rights Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. B.7, ss. 1, 2(1), 6(1). Text from Ontario e-Laws, read 2026-10-04.

México 5

24Ley General para la Inclusión de las Personas con Discapacidad, arts. 2 fr. XXVI, 16 fr. III, 17 fr. II, última reforma DOF 14-06-2024 (México).

25Ley Federal para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación, art. 9 fr. XXII Quáter, adicionada DOF 04-12-2023 (México).

26Ley de Aviación Civil, arts. 47 Bis fr. I, 47 Bis 1 (México).

35Ley Federal para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación, arts. 83, 83 Bis, 83 Ter (medidas administrativas y de reparación), última reforma DOF 14-11-2025.

36Código Penal Federal (México), art. 149 Ter, última reforma DOF 13-03-2026. Prison of one to three years or 150–300 days of community service, and up to 200 días multa, for denying a service on discriminatory grounds; penalty increased by one half for public servants, with removal and disqualification.

39Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, art. 1°, últimas reformas DOF 02-06-2026. Ley Federal de Protección al Consumidor, arts. 58, 128 (multas actualizadas DOF 23-12-2025), 128 Bis. Ley Federal del Trabajo, arts. 3° (DOF 15-01-2026), 133 fr. I.

40Ley para la Protección de los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad del Estado de Nuevo León, arts. 2 fr. XXVI, 44 bis–44 bis 7 (adicionados P.O. 24-12-2008). Text from the H. Congreso de Nuevo León.

Agencies, surveys and import rules 5

12Wisch RF. Table of State Assistance Animal Laws. Animal Legal & Historical Center, Michigan State University College of Law, 2025.

27Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Import Reference Document (as referenced in the Health of Animals Regulations), dogs — personal imports; assistance-dog clause; no post-import quarantine.

28SENASICA (Servicio Nacional de Sanidad, Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria). Requirements and Procedures for Traveling to Mexico with Your Pet. gob.mx, last updated 4 August 2026. New World screwworm inspection document for dogs from the United States; inspection only from Canada.

29U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Entry Requirements for Dogs from Dog-Rabies Free or Low-Risk Countries (reviewed 22 July 2024) and High-Risk Countries for Dog Rabies. Canada and Mexico not listed as high-risk.

30Reglamento de Autotransporte Federal y Servicios Auxiliares (México), terminal accessibility provisions; no service-animal clause.