Expressing the disapproval of the House of Representatives regarding the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption and encouraging Japan to enact a nationwide ban on such practices.

Bill Number

H.Res. 1110

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

International Affairs

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-03-09: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Last Updated

2026-06-26T08:06:50Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This House Resolution (H. Res. 1110) expresses the U.S. House of Representatives' disapproval of the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption. It encourages Japan to implement a nationwide ban on these practices, highlighting shared values between the U.S. and Japan on animal welfare and the human-animal bond.

Key Provisions

The resolution includes the following main elements, structured as "Resolved" clauses:

• Encouragement for a ban: Urges Japan to enact a national prohibition on killing dogs and cats for food.
• Affirmation of shared values: Recognizes common U.S.-Japan commitments to protecting companion animals (pets) and service animals (those trained to assist people with disabilities).
• Promotion of cooperation: Calls for ongoing collaboration between the two countries on animal rights and welfare efforts.
• Respect for protections: States that the resolution does not aim to disrupt religious or cultural practices safeguarded by domestic (national) or international law.
• Condemnation of the practice: Denounces the killing and trade of millions of dogs and cats for meat as cruel, inhumane, and outdated for modern times.
• Commendation of advocates: Praises civil society groups, such as the World Dog Alliance, for their global efforts to end the consumption of dog and cat meat.

The resolution is supported by "Whereas" clauses noting the U.S. ban on such slaughter (enacted in 2018), bans in other Asian countries and cities, and growing Japanese support for animal welfare.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This is a non-binding resolution, meaning it does not create, amend, or repeal any laws. It serves as a formal statement of opinion from the House and introduces no legal changes to U.S. or international law.

Potential Impacts

• On government agencies: Minimal direct impact, but it may prompt the U.S. Department of State to discuss animal welfare in diplomatic talks with Japan, fostering informal international cooperation.
• On citizens: Could raise awareness among U.S. and Japanese citizens about animal rights, potentially influencing public opinion and supporting advocacy campaigns without affecting individual rights or daily life.
• On international relations: Strengthens symbolic ties between the U.S. and Japan on ethical issues, signaling U.S. support for global animal welfare trends. It may encourage similar actions in other countries but has no enforceable effect on trade or foreign policy.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• U.S. House of Representatives: As the issuing body, it positions itself as a leader on international animal welfare.
• Japanese government and public: Directly addressed, with potential influence on lawmakers (e.g., the All-Party Animal Welfare Members' Alliance) and citizens advocating for change.
• Animal welfare organizations: Groups like the World Dog Alliance benefit from official recognition and may gain momentum for their campaigns.
• Companion animal owners and advocates: Pet owners and service animal users in both countries, who share cultural views on dogs and cats as family members rather than food sources.
• International community: Other nations with similar practices (e.g., in Asia) may face indirect pressure through this high-profile statement.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: As a simple resolution, it has no binding force and cannot override laws or treaties. It explicitly avoids challenging protected cultural or religious practices, reducing risks of legal challenges under international human rights standards (e.g., freedom of religion).
• Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's role in expressing foreign policy views under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, without infringing on executive branch authority over diplomacy.
• Political: Represents a bipartisan (introduced by representatives from different parties) effort to advance "soft power" diplomacy on humanitarian issues. It could enhance U.S. credibility in global ethics discussions but might be seen as cultural interference by critics, potentially straining relations if Japan perceives it as overreach. The resolution's focus on shared values minimizes controversy while promoting progressive animal welfare norms.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Garbarino, Andrew R. [R-NY-2]

Cosponsors (8)

Rep. Davis, Donald G. [D-NC-1], Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-1], Rep. Joyce, David P. [R-OH-14], Rep. Frankel, Lois [D-FL-22], Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22], Rep. Hoyer, Steny H. [D-MD-5], Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19], Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46]

Recent Actions

• 2026-03-09: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
• 2026-03-09: Submitted in House
• 2026-03-09: Submitted in House

Bill Versions

• Expressing the disapproval of the House of Representatives regarding the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption and encouraging Japan to enact a nationwide ban on such practices. — issued 2026-03-09 — PDF (3 pages)