California’s New Pet Laws
What AB 506 AB 519 and SB 312 changed, and why those changes are driving responsible breeders out of California
On January 1, 2026 three California laws took effect that fundamentally changed the legal risk of selling a puppy to a California resident.
AB 506 AB 519 and SB 312 were presented as consumer protection measures. In practice they created unprecedented legal exposure criminal penalties for administrative errors and mandatory public disclosure of private information.
This page explains what each law does how it departs from national legal standards and why targeted amendments are necessary to restore balance without removing consumer protections.
On January 1 2026 three California laws took effect that fundamentally changed the legal risk of selling a puppy to a California resident.
AB 506 AB 519 and SB 312 were presented as consumer protection measures. In practice they created unprecedented legal exposure criminal penalties for administrative errors and mandatory public disclosure of private information.
This page explains what each law does how it departs from national legal standards and why targeted amendments are necessary to restore balance without removing consumer protections.
THESE ARE NEWSOM'S LAWS.
AB 506
One Way Attorney Fees
What AB 506 Changed
AB 506 created a one-way attorney fee provision allowing buyers to recover attorney fees if they prevail in a dispute involving a pet purchase.
The law does not allow breeders to recover attorney fees even when the breeder fully complies with the law and wins the case.
Why This Is Legally Unbalanced
Under AB 506, every California sale carries a potential twenty-thousand to forty-thousand dollar legal exposure regardless of outcome.
This creates a system where:
• Buyers face no downside to filing suit
• Breeders absorb full legal costs even when they win
• Frivolous or speculative claims are encouraged
• Insurance coverage is unavailable or unaffordable
This is not how consumer protection statutes function in most states.
Real World Effect
Responsible breeders cannot price or insure this risk. Many have stopped serving California entirely.
Underground sellers and scammers remain unaffected because they cannot be located or sued.
SB 312
Criminal Penalties and Public Disclosure
What SB 312 Changed
SB 312 made violations of health certificate requirements misdemeanors and classified health certificates as public records without redaction.
This applies regardless of whether the violation caused harm to the buyer or animal.
Criminal Exposure for Administrative Errors
Under SB 312 the following can trigger criminal liability
• Health certificate filed late
• Incorrect form version used
• Formatting or clerical errors
• Submission errors made by a veterinarian
These violations are treated the same as intentional misconduct.
Mandatory Public Disclosure
SB 312 requires that breeder information, including home addresses, be made publicly available online without redaction.
This applies even when
• The buyer already receives the certificate directly
• No enforcement action exists
• No public health investigation is underway
No comparable small business category is required to publish home addresses as a condition of lawful operation.
Real World Effect
Compliance oriented breeders exit the market to avoid criminal exposure and personal safety risks.
Operators who ignore all regulations remain unaffected.
AB 519
Expanded Enforcement Authority
What AB 519 Changed
AB 519 expanded enforcement authority, allowing the Attorney General to bring direct actions related to pet sales violations.
This authority exists independently of private lawsuits.
Why This Matters
A single transaction can now expose a breeder to
• A private civil lawsuit
• Mandatory one-way attorney fees
• A separate enforcement action by the state
This creates compounding legal exposure that cannot be reasonably managed by small or mid-sized operators.
Real World Effect
Breeders face double jeopardy-style risk without additional due process protections.
Risk is multiplied without improving consumer outcomes.
How California Differs From Every Other Major State
California
Attorney Fees
Buyer recovers fees only
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Documentation Errors
Misdemeanor criminal charges
Privacy Protection
Home addresses published without redaction
Insurance Availability
Often unavailable due to one-way fees and criminal exposure
Other States
Attorney Fees
Prevailing party recovers fees
Balances risk and deters abuse
Documentation Errors
Civil fine warnings or license suspension
Privacy Protection
Personal identifying information protected
Privacy Protection
Home addreses published without redaction
Insurance Availability
Common and affordable
Market Outcome
Responsible breeders exit
Underground market expands
Market Outcome
Legitimate market remains viable
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
These laws share three core problems that make compliance impossible and enforcement ineffective.
Market Outcome
-
Responsible breeders exit
-
Underground market expands
Market Outcome
-
Legitimate market remains viable
Insurance Availability
-
Common and affordable
Insurance Availability
-
Often unavailable due to one-way fees and criminal exposure
Privacy Protection
-
Personal identifying information protected
Privacy Protection
-
Home addresses published without redaction
Documentation Errors
-
Misdemeanor criminal charges
Documentation Errors
-
Civil fine warnings or license suspension
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Prevailing party recovers fees
-
Balances risk and deters
California
Other States
How California Differs From Every Other Major State
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
California
Other States
How California Differs From Every Other Major State
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
Attorney Fees
-
Buyer recovers fees only
-
Breeder recovers nothing even when winning
California
Other States
How California Differs From Every Other Major State
Amendment 1:
AB 506 Attorney Fees
Current Language
In any action under this section, the prevailing plaintiff shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Proposed Amendment
In any action under this section, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Why This Fix Works
• Preserves consumer protection
• Deters frivolous lawsuits
• Aligns California with national standards
• Restores insurability
Amendment 2:
SB 312 Privacy Protection
Current Language
Health certificates are public records subject to disclosure without redaction.
Proposed Amendment Option A
Health certificates shall be confidential and exempt from public disclosure except to buyers, regulators, law enforcement, and public health officials.
Proposed Amendment Option B
Health certificates are public records with personal identifying information redacted before release.
Why This Fix Works
• Buyers still receive full documentation
• Regulators retain enforcement access
• Safety risks are eliminated
Amendment 3: SB 312 Proportional Penalties
Current Enforcement
All violations are classified as misdemeanors.
Proposed Tiered Enforcement
First violation: written warning and correction period
Second violation: administrative fine
Third violation: license suspension
Criminal penalties are reserved for fraud abuse or intentional misconduct
Why This Fix Works
• Encourages compliance
• Preserves criminal enforcement for serious harm
• Matches enforcement models used nationwide
FREQUENTLY ASKED
QUESTIONS
No. All disclosures, health certificates, and rights to sue remain intact. The amendments only correct the imbalance and disproportional penalties.
Enforcement does not affect operators who already ignore the law. It only increases pressure on those attempting to comply.
In most cases no. One way attorney fees and criminal exposure are not insurable.
It ensures both sides bear risk. This discourages abuse and encourages fair settlement.
Yes. Most states already use these standards without compromising consumer protection.
No. Puppy mills already operate illegally. These changes only help compliance oriented breeders remain in the legal market.
FIX THE LAW WITHOUT LOSING PROTECTION
Sign the Petition
Add your name to demand immediate changes to California’s pet laws.
This petition calls for common sense amendments that protect consumers and animal welfare without criminalizing responsibility.
Share Your Story
Have you been affected by breeder refusals, scams, or loss of access to responsibly bred pets?
Your experience helps lawmakers understand the real-world consequences of these laws.