U.S. Code » Title 7 » Chapter CHAPTER 54— TRANSPORTATION, SALE, AND HANDLING OF CERTAIN ANIMALS

7 U.S.C. § 2131

Congressional statement of policy

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar
The Congress finds that animals and activities which are regulated under this chapter are either in interstate or foreign commerce or substantially affect such commerce or the free flow thereof, and that regulation of animals and activities as provided in this chapter is necessary to prevent and eliminate burdens upon such commerce and to effectively regulate such commerce, in order—(1) to insure that animals intended for use in research facilities or for exhibition purposes or for use as pets are provided humane care and treatment;(2) to assure the humane treatment of animals during transportation in commerce; and(3) to protect the owners of animals from the theft of their animals by preventing the sale or use of animals which have been stolen.The Congress further finds that it is essential to regulate, as provided in this chapter, the transportation, purchase, sale, housing, care, handling, and treatment of animals by carriers or by persons or organizations engaged in using them for research or experimental purposes or for exhibition purposes or holding them for sale as pets or for any such purpose or use.(Pub. L. 89–544, § 1(b), formerly § 1, Aug. 24, 1966, 80 Stat. 350; Pub. L. 91–579, § 2, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1560; renumbered and amended Pub. L. 94–279, § 2, Apr. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 417.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–279 restated and expanded objectives of this chapter to include regulation of animals and activities in, or substantially affecting, interstate or foreign commerce in order to prevent and eliminate burdens on such commerce and to assure the humane treatment of animals during transportation.

1970—Pub. L. 91–579 restated objectives to include all animals as defined instead of only cats and dogs and expanded coverage to regulate animals intended for use for exhibition purposes or for use as pets.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1985 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–198, title XVII, § 1759, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1650, provided that: “This subtitle [subtitle F (§§ 1751–1759), enacting section 2157 of this title, amending sections 2132, 2143 to 2146, and 2149 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section] shall take effect 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 1985].”

Effective Date of 1970 Amendment

Pub. L. 91–579, § 23, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1565, provided that: “The amendments made by this Act [enacting section 2155 of this title, amending this section and sections 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2136, 2137, 2138, 2139, 2140, 2141, 2142, 2143, 2144, 2145, 2146, 2147, 2149, and 2150 of this title, repealing section 2148 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section] shall take effect one year after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 24, 1970], except for the amendments to sections 16, 17, 19, and 20 of the Act of August 24, 1966 [sections 2146, 2147, 2149, and 2150 of this title], which shall become effective thirty days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 24, 1970]”.

Short Title of 1976 Amendment

Pub. L. 94–279, § 1, Apr. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 417, provided: “That this Act [enacting section 2156 of this title, amending this section, sections 2132, 2134, 2136, 2139 to 2146, 2149, 2153 to 2155 of this title, and section 3001 of Title 39, Postal Service, repealing section 2150 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section] may be cited as the ‘Animal Welfare Act Amendments of 1976’.”

Short Title of 1970 Amendment

Pub. L. 91–579, § 1, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1560, provided: “That this Act [enacting section 2155 of this title, amending this section and sections 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2136, 2137, 2138, 2139, 2140, 2141, 2142, 2143, 2144, 2145, 2146, 2147, 2149, and 2150 of this title, repealing section 2148 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section] may be cited as the ‘Animal Welfare Act of 1970’.”

Short Title

Pub. L. 89–544, § 1(a), as added by Pub. L. 94–279, § 2, Apr. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 417, provided: “That this Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Animal Welfare Act’.”

Congressional Findings for 1985 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–198, title XVII, subtitle F (§§ 1751–1759), § 1751, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1645, provided that: “For the purposes of this subtitle [see Effective Date of 1985 Amendment note above], the Congress finds that—“(1) the use of animals is instrumental in certain research and education for advancing knowledge of cures and treatment for diseases and injuries which afflict both humans and animals;“(2) methods of testing that do not use animals are being and continue to be developed which are faster, less expensive, and more accurate than traditional animal experiments for some purposes and further opportunities exist for the development of these methods of testing;“(3) measures which eliminate or minimize the unnecessary duplication of experiments on animals can result in more productive use of Federal funds; and“(4) measures which help meet the public concern for laboratory animal care and treatment are important in assuring that research will continue to progress.”

Extended Definition of “Animal”

Pub. L. 99–198, title XVII, 1756(b), Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1650, provided that: “For purposes of this Act [see Tables for classification], the term ‘animal’ shall have the same meaning as defined in section 2(g) of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2132(g)).”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 158 cases (32 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Sonny Perdue, 872 F.3d 602 (D.C. Cir. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Sonny Perdue, 872 F.3d 602 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “24, 1966); see also 7 U.S.C. § 2131 . In 1970, Congress amended the Act to cover animal “exhibitors,” a category that includes zoos.”
People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Miami Seaquarium, 189 F. Supp. 3d 1327 (S.D. Fla. 2016). · cites it 10× “In support, Plaintiffs allege that the conditions of Lolita’s captivity do not meet the minimum standards for captive marine mammals, applicable to exhibitors under the Animal Welfare Act (“AWA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131 et seq., and its implementing regulations, Title 9 of the Code of…”
Food & Water Watch, Inc. v. Thomas Vilsack, 808 F.3d 905 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “There, PETA made expenditures to fill a void left by the USDA when, according to PETA, the USDA unlawfully failed to apply the protections of the Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131 et seq., to birds. Id. at 1091 .”
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. United States Dep't of Agric., 797 F.3d 1087 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “KAREN LECRAET HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: In 2004, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA or Agency) announced that, for the first time, it intended to apply the protections of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA or Act), 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131 et seq., to birds. Although the Agency…”
Peggy Hill v. Barry Coggins, 867 F.3d 499 (4th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “Of note, the court based its conclusion that the Zoo did not harass its bears entirely on its determination that the Zoo’s animal husbandry practices complied with applicable standards under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), 7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq. The court explicitly declined to…”
Tracey Kuehl v. Pamela Sellner, 887 F.3d 845 (8th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “Defendants first argue that the they could not have violated the Act because the Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq. (Animal Act) provides a “safe harbor” -8- for licensed facilities.”
Bajalo v. Nw. Univ., 860 N.E.2d 556 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 3× “As such, defendant must comply with the Federal Animal Welfare Act (Act) ( 7 U.S.C. §2131 et seq. (2000)), which aims “to insure that ‘animals intended for use in research facilities *** are provided humane care and treatment’ ” ( 7 U.”
New York Pet Welfare Ass'n, Inc. v. New York City, 850 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2017). “The AWA applies broadly, covering any “dealer” — a “person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or transports, except as a carrier, buys, or sells, or negotiates the purchase or sale of .”
United States v. Gibert, 677 F.3d 613 (4th Cir. 2012). · cites it 3× “” 7 U.S.C. § 2131 . The statement of policy also provides that “[t]he Congress further finds that it is essential to regulate, as provided in this chapter, the transportation, purchase, sale, housing, care, handling, and treatment of animals by carriers or by persons or…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund, Inc. v. Mike Espy, Sec'y, United States Dep't of Agric., 29 F.3d 720 (D.C. Cir. 1994). · cites it 3× “KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: The appellants, various government agencies and officials sued below and intervenor National Association for Biomedical Research, seek reversal of a district court decision setting aside United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)…”
Sylvia Singletary v. Howard Univ., 939 F.3d 287 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “The Animal Welfare Act of 1966, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131–2159, requires that research institutions receiving federal funds meet prescribed standards for the care and monitoring of animals used in their work, see id.”
Just Puppies, Inc. v. Anthony Brown, 123 F.4th 652 (4th Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “1:19- 5 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2170 Doc: 56 Filed: 12/11/2024 Pg: 6 of 27 Animal Welfare Act (AWA), 7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq. (Count 1), and violates the Commerce Clause of the Constitution (Counts 2 and 4).”
Show all 158 citing cases →
— 7 U.S.C. § 2131(1) — 1 case
Bajalo v. Nw. Univ. (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.