Dog Breed Restrictions: The Preemption Map for Pit Bull & Rottweiler Laws in 2026
If you own a pit bull, Rottweiler, Cane Corso, or any of the breeds that tend to appear on restricted lists, there is a single legal question that matters more than any other: does your state allow cities to ban breeds, or not? That one question — preemption — decides whether a local ordinance in your city is enforceable at all, whether a landlord's lease restriction has a state-law backstop, and whether an insurance exclusion is the only thing actually standing between you and your dog. Twenty-two states now preempt local breed bans. Roughly twenty more allow them. And even in preemption states, landlords, HOAs, insurers, and the Department of Defense can all still restrict specific breeds. This guide walks through the full map in 2026.
BSL vs dangerous-dog laws: why the distinction matters
Breed Specific Legislation, or BSL, targets a dog based on its breed or physical description — American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Bully, Rottweiler, and so on. A BSL ordinance makes it illegal to own, transport, or breed those dogs within city limits regardless of whether the individual animal has ever bitten anyone. Dangerous-dog laws work in the opposite direction: they target individual dogs based on documented behavior, typically after a declared bite, unprovoked attack, or repeated running-at-large incident. All 50 states have some form of dangerous-dog statute; fewer than half still allow BSL. The academic consensus, the CDC, the American Veterinary Medical Association, and the American Bar Association have all opposed BSL on the grounds that it does not reduce bite rates and misidentifies breed in the majority of visual assessments. That trend is what has driven the 20-year wave of state preemption statutes.
States that preempt BSL
Twenty-two states now bar cities and counties from passing breed-specific ordinances. The list, with the operative statute or session law:
- California — Food & Agriculture Code §31683 allows breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter and breeding-permit programs but bars outright breed bans. - Colorado — SB 04-111, passed in 2004 and codified at C.R.S. §18-9-204.5(5), preempts municipal breed bans; the law was strengthened after Denver repealed its long-running ban in 2020. - Florida — §767.14 bars any ordinance that is specific to breed, with a narrow grandfather clause (covered below). - Illinois — 510 ILCS 5/24 prohibits any political subdivision from enacting breed-specific regulation. - New Jersey — N.J.S.A. 4:19-36 preempts breed-specific regulation by any municipality. - New York — Agriculture & Markets Law §107(5) preempts municipal breed-specific laws. - Pennsylvania — 3 P.S. §459-507-A preempts local breed-specific ordinances. - Texas — Health & Safety Code §822.047 bars any local regulation specific to breed. - Nevada — SB 392 (2013), codified at NRS 202.500, bars declarations of dangerousness based solely on breed. - Connecticut — Conn. Gen. Stat. §22-339c preempts municipal breed bans. - Maine — 7 M.R.S. §3950-A preempts breed-specific ordinances. - Massachusetts — M.G.L. c.140 §157 bars cities and towns from regulating dogs based on breed. - Michigan — case law and MCL 287.1101 et seq. have been read to preempt breed bans, reinforced after the Ypsilanti and Waterford repeals. - Minnesota — Minn. Stat. §347.51 bars breed as a sole basis for dangerous-dog regulation. - New Mexico — N.M. Stat. §77-1A-8 preempts breed-specific local ordinances. - Oklahoma — 4 Okla. Stat. §46 preempts local breed bans. - Rhode Island — R.I. Gen. Laws §4-13.1-18 bars municipal breed-specific regulations. - South Carolina — S.C. Code §47-3-50 preempts municipal breed-specific ordinances. - Utah — Utah Code §18-2-101 preempts local breed-specific laws. - Virginia — Va. Code §3.2-6540 bars breed as a sole basis for dangerous-dog classification. - Washington — RCW 16.08.090 as amended in 2019 bars outright breed bans; cities may regulate dangerous dogs only through behavior-based criteria.
The practical effect of preemption is that any pre-existing breed-specific ordinance in these states is unenforceable, and cities that tried to keep them on the books — Denver is the most famous example — have had to repeal.
The landmark bans that were overturned
Denver ran the most-cited pit bull ban in the country from 1989 to 2020. After Colorado's SB 04-111 preemption statute passed, Denver defended its ordinance on home-rule grounds and the Colorado Supreme Court initially allowed the city to keep it. In 2020 Denver voters approved Ballot Measure 2J, repealing the ban and replacing it with a breed-neutral "restricted breed license" that itself was phased out in 2022. Aurora, Colorado repealed its 14-year ban in 2019 after a similar ballot initiative. Ypsilanti, Michigan repealed its pit bull ordinance in 2020. San Francisco retired its breed-specific spay/neuter mandate for pit bulls in 2019 in favor of a behavior-based framework. These repeals set the template other mid-size cities have followed.
States that allow BSL
Roughly twenty states still allow cities and counties to pass breed-specific ordinances: Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas (at the county level), Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri (county and city level), Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio (which repealed its state-level pit bull designation in 2012 but did not preempt cities), Oregon (which repealed its state ban in 2005 but leaves local authority intact), South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. In these states, whether your breed is legal depends entirely on the specific city or county you live in. Two adjacent cities can have completely different rules, and moving across a municipal boundary can render a legally-owned dog suddenly illegal.
Miami-Dade's pit bull ban: the Florida grandfather clause
Florida's preemption statute, §767.14, contains a narrow grandfather clause that exempted any breed-specific ordinance in effect on October 1, 1990. Miami-Dade County's pit bull ban, enacted in 1989, qualified — making it the only jurisdiction in Florida legally permitted to ban pit bulls. Miami-Dade voters reaffirmed the ban in a 2012 referendum. In May 2023, the Florida legislature passed SB 942, which stripped the grandfather exception and took effect October 1, 2023, forcing Miami-Dade to repeal. The ban is gone as of 2026, and Florida is now a clean preemption state with no remaining carve-outs.
Cities that still ban
In non-preemption states, hundreds of cities still enforce breed bans. The notable ones in 2026:
- Sioux City, Iowa — pit bull ban since 2008, still active. - Cedar Rapids, Iowa — breed restrictions with registration and liability-insurance requirements for listed breeds. - Council Bluffs, Iowa — full pit bull ban. - Overland Park, Kansas — retains breed restrictions while neighboring Kansas City, Kansas repealed its ban in 2018. - Independence, Missouri — repealed its long-running pit bull ban in 2021; Kansas City, Missouri repealed in 2018; Springfield, Missouri retains restrictions. - Various Ohio, Arkansas, and Mississippi municipalities — dozens of smaller cities still enforce breed-specific ordinances, typically targeting pit bull-type dogs and sometimes Rottweilers.
The pattern since 2018 has been steady municipal repeal: Kansas City MO (2018), Kansas City KS (2018), Ypsilanti MI (2020), Denver (2020), Independence MO (2021), Miami-Dade (2023). Cities that keep their bans tend to be smaller and more rural, where the political pressure to repeal is weaker.
The insurance dimension
Even in preemption states, insurance is where breed restrictions bite hardest. State Farm is one of the few major insurers that does not maintain a breed blacklist. Most of the rest — including Allstate, Farmers, Nationwide, Liberty Mutual, and Travelers — either exclude certain breeds entirely from homeowners and renters policies, charge surcharges, or refuse to renew after a listed-breed claim. The typical excluded-breeds list tracks BSL ordinances closely: pit bull-type dogs, Rottweilers, Dobermans, German Shepherds in some policies, Cane Corso, Presa Canario, Akita, Chow Chow, and wolf hybrids. State preemption does not reach private insurance contracts. Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and New York have considered insurance-discrimination bills; only a handful have passed and most are narrow.
HOAs and condo associations
HOA and condo covenants function as private contracts and are generally not preempted by state BSL statutes. Even in California, Florida, or Texas — all preemption states — a homeowners association can enforce a breed restriction written into its CC&Rs. California's AB 1459 (2023) limited HOA pet-size restrictions but did not address breed restrictions directly. The practical result is that buyers in a preemption state still need to read the CC&Rs before moving in with a listed breed.
Public housing and city-owned housing authorities
Most city-owned housing authorities maintain breed restrictions that operate independently of municipal BSL. Chicago Housing Authority, NYCHA, Los Angeles Housing Authority, and dozens of others restrict pit bulls and Rottweilers in public and Section 8 units. These restrictions are rooted in the housing authority's tenant-selection plan and are reviewed under HUD guidance, not state BSL preemption.
Military housing: the DoD 2009 policy
The Department of Defense issued a policy in 2009 barring pit bull-type dogs, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Chow Chows, and wolf hybrids from privatized military housing on most installations. Individual service branches and installation commanders have authority to expand the list. The policy applies regardless of state BSL preemption because military installations operate under federal jurisdiction. Military families with listed breeds are typically forced to board their dogs off-base or rehome them at PCS orders.
Dangerous-dog alternatives: the behavior-based framework
All 50 states have individual dangerous-dog or vicious-dog declaration laws. The typical framework: a dog that bites without provocation, attacks livestock, or runs at large repeatedly can be declared dangerous by an animal-control officer or court. Declared dogs face registration requirements, mandatory microchipping, posted "beware of dog" signage, secure enclosures with specific fencing and gate requirements, muzzle-and-leash-in-public rules, $100,000 to $500,000 liability insurance, and often breed-neutral spay/neuter. A second serious bite typically authorizes euthanasia. This is the regulatory regime that preemption states point to as the substitute for BSL — same public-safety goal, individual-animal basis.
The service-dog exception
Under Title II and Title III of the ADA and 28 C.F.R. §35.136 and §36.302, state and local government entities and public accommodations cannot exclude service dogs based on breed. The DOJ has issued explicit guidance confirming that a city with a pit bull ban cannot enforce it against a service dog performing work for a handler with a disability. The service-dog exception is narrow — it applies to task-trained service dogs as defined by the ADA, not emotional support animals — but within that scope it overrides state and local BSL. The Fair Housing Act reaches further in the rental context, covering both service animals and documented emotional support animals as reasonable accommodations landlords cannot refuse based on breed.
Rental housing: the landlord override
Even in preemption states, landlords can enforce breed restrictions in their leases. State preemption statutes target government action, not private contracts. The only meaningful federal backstop for renters is the Fair Housing Act's reasonable-accommodation rule for assistance animals, which covers both ADA service dogs and FHA-documented emotional support animals regardless of breed. Without documentation, a landlord in California, New York, or Texas can lawfully refuse to rent to a pit bull or Rottweiler owner, and the majority do. The gap between municipal preemption and rental-market reality is the single biggest complaint pit bull and Rottweiler owners raise even in the friendliest states.
Breeds most commonly targeted
BSL and insurance blacklists tend to track the same short list: American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Bully, and any mix with the visual characteristics of those breeds (so-called "pit bull-type dogs"); Rottweiler; Doberman Pinscher; Cane Corso; Presa Canario; Dogo Argentino; Fila Brasileiro; American Bulldog; Tosa Inu; and wolf hybrids. Some ordinances and policies add German Shepherd, Akita, Chow Chow, Alaskan Malamute, Siberian Husky, and Boxer. The visual-identification problem is well-documented — studies consistently find that shelter staff and animal-control officers misidentify breed on appearance more than half the time — which is one of the main legal vulnerabilities BSL ordinances face even where they are permitted.
How to check your specific city
State law tells you whether a local breed ban is even allowed. Your city code tells you whether one is actually on the books. Before adopting a restricted breed, moving with one, or signing a lease, you need to answer six questions: Does your state preempt BSL? If not, does your city or county have a breed-specific ordinance? What is the exact breed list and how is identification handled? Are there registration, muzzle, insurance, or enclosure requirements for listed breeds? Does your HOA, condo association, or landlord impose separate breed restrictions? Is your insurance carrier going to cover the dog? CityRuleLookup maintains an animals page for every city we cover, pulling together the breed restrictions, dangerous-dog rules, licensing requirements, and enforcement contacts. If you are in Denver, Miami, Ypsilanti, Overland Park, Independence, Sioux City, Cedar Rapids, San Francisco, Seattle, or Chicago, start there — and then confirm the exact language with your city's own code before you bring a dog home.