Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Service Animals Courts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Disability specialist details ADA rules for service animals in New Mexico courts
Summary
At a New Mexico Courts webinar, Gemini Schell of the Governor’s Commission on Disability reviewed ADA rules for service animals in courts, the two permitted identification questions staff may ask, protections for animals in training under state law, and limited grounds for excluding animals.
Gemini Schell, a disability specialist with the New Mexico Governor’s Commission on Disability, told a New Mexico Courts webinar that under Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act service animals are limited to dogs and miniature horses and generally must be permitted wherever the handler may go in a public program, including court facilities.
Schell said the key operational rule for frontline staff is simple: if a person’s disability or the animal’s task is not obvious, staff may ask only two questions — “Is this animal required due to a disability?” and “What task or work has this animal been trained to perform for you?” — and must not ask for proof of disability or for training certificates. “You can ask, is this animal required due to a disability? And you can ask, what task or work has this animal been trained to perform for you?” Schell said. She emphasized that staff may not demand documentation, registration, ID cards, or proof of professional training.
The webinar reiterated distinctions among federal laws: the Department of Justice enforces ADA Titles II and III; the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (HUD) enforces the Fair Housing Act; and the Department of Transportation enforces the Air Carrier Access Act. Schell noted recent federal guidance has narrowed Fair Housing Act coverage for assistance animals to animals trained to perform a specific task, reducing prior protections for emotional-support animals.
Schell described several rules and exceptions courts should apply. Service animals in training are protected under New Mexico law, she said, and courts should treat them as service animals for access purposes. Animals may be excluded when they are out of control, not housebroken, or when their presence would “fundamentally alter” the nature of the program; if an animal is excluded the handler must be allowed to return without the animal. Schell also said staff may ask whether an animal’s vaccines are up to date, but may not insist on seeing proof of vaccination.
On state law enforcement, Schell told attendees that the New Mexico Service Animal Act (NMSAA) mirrors many ADA provisions but has rarely been enforced since it was finalized in 2014: “...almost no one has heard about this New Mexico Service Animal Act,” she said, citing limited use by police and first responders. The NMSAA includes misdemeanor penalties for misrepresenting a pet or emotional-support animal as a service animal and for interference with a service animal; Schell said fines can reach $1,000 or up to a year in jail under the statute’s text.
The webinar included scenario-based Q&A relevant to court operations: how to respond to a handler wearing a vest, handling repeated barking or aggressive behavior, accommodating juror allergies (attempt to separate jurors, use masks or remote video if available, or replace a juror if separation is impossible), and workplace accommodation questions under Title I (where employers may request medical documentation and must engage in an interactive process). Schell advised individualized, case-by-case assessments rather than blanket policies.
The session closed with a reminder that the presentation slides and a recording will be posted to the New Mexico judiciary YouTube channel and that participants can contact Schell or Peggy Cadwell for follow-up resources.
