42 nations have now banned declawing cats, & nine of the ten Canadian provinces, but only four U.S. states
SACRAMENTO, California––California governor Gavin Newsom on October 9, 2025 endorsed into law AB 867 by state assembly member Alex Lee, a Democrat from Milpitas, “which bans the practice of declawing cats when not medically necessary,” a media release from Newsom’s office explained.
Added the media release, “Many other countries also ban the practice, which can lead to pain, infection, and behavioral changes.”
The apparent hint that Newsom’s publicists may anticipate California seceding from the United States, amid Newsom’s prominent opposition to the policies and decrees of U.S. president Donald Trump, was probably just a mistake of nomenclature.
Though if California was a country, it would have the fourth largest economy of any nation, it is in fact still just one of 50 U.S. states.
Good company
But California is in good company in banning declawing cats. New York state, which if an independent nation would have the eighth largest economy of any country, banned declawing cats in 2019.
(See New York bans declawing cats; Massachusetts next?)
Maryland banned declawing cats in 2022; Virginia in 2024; Massachusetts on April 8, 2025; and Rhode Island in July 2025, taking effect on September 1, 2025.
Cities prohibiting declawing include Austin, Texas; Denver, Colorado; St. Louis, Missouri; and, within California, both Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The very first city to ban declawing cats was West Hollywood, California, in 2003.
Among the 42 nations that now prohibit declawing cats are Australia, England, France, Germany, Israel, New Zealand, and Switzerland.
Among the ten Canadian provinces, only Ontario does not ban declawing. The province of Nova Scotia banned declawing in 2018, before any U.S. state.
Not the numbers, but the suffering
Across the U.S., under 1% of feline veterinary visits involve declawing, according to American Veterinary Medical Association data.
By comparison, about 14% of feline veterinary visits involve spay/neuter.
Opposition to declawing, however is based not on the frequency of the operation, often exaggerated by opponents, but rather upon the catastrophic effects on the cats unlucky enough to be subjected to it.
This was underscored on August 17, 2025 by a paper entitled “Declawing in Cat is associated with neuroplastic sensitization and long-term painful afflictions,” published in Scientific Reports, a subsidiary of Nature.com.
Twelve Quebec veterinarians led by Eric Troncy, director of the Groupe de recherche en pharmacologie animale du Québec in St. Hyacinthe, better known as GREPEC, concluded through extensive comparison of declawed cats with naturally occurring osteoarthritis that declawed cats “exhibited significant somatosensory alterations (hyperalgesia and allodynia) and greater biomechanical (worse in heavier cats) and functional impairments.”
Greater sensitivity to pain
Further, the GREPEC veterinarians found, “The alterations were not dependent on the number of declawed paws (two forelimbs vs. four paws). This alarming phenotype was associated with objective nervous conduction abnormalities indicative of worsened axonopathy in declawed cats,” meaning greater sensitivity to pain.
“Our findings highlight the impact of chronic post-declaw pain and support the need to develop therapeutic strategies to alleviate chronic pain in declawed cats,” the GREPEC team concluded, “and highlights the pertinence of establishing a global ban of this elective procedure.”
Quebec, incidentally, banned declawing cats in 2024.
Bills meant to “Stop the puppy mill pipeline”
As well as signing the bill to ban declawing cats throughout California, governor Gavin Newsom signed three bills meant to “Stop the puppy mill pipeline,” the governor’s office media release said.
“Eighty percent of sponsored pet ads may be fake,” the Newsom office media release alleged, “but AB 506 by California assembly member Steve Bennett, a Democrat from Ventura, “holds pet sellers accountable, requiring them to disclose the pet’s origin and health information.
“The legislation also voids contracts that include non-refundable deposits,” the media release said, “which all too often result in a bait-and-switch by committing hopeful pet parents to unhealthy pets – and feeds the puppy mill industry.
“Many puppy mills pretend to be small home breeders by selling pets through brokers,” the Newsom office media release continued, “so AB 519 by assembly member Marc Berman, “ a Democrat from Menlo Park, “prohibits third-party pet brokers, particularly online pet brokers, from selling cats, puppies, and rabbits bred by others for profit in California.”
(Daniel Leventhal photo)
Finally, the Newsom office media release said, “SB 312 by California state senator Thomas Umberg,” a Democrat from Santa Ana, “requires dog importers to submit health certificates electronically to the California Department of Food & Agriculture within 10 days of shipment,” which must be made available to the public “upon request.”
Please donate to support our work:
https://www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Discover more from Animals 24-7
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Just one more reason I’m so proud to be second generation Californian! After advocating for this for a lifetime, it’s finally law, as it should be globally.
And to think that the fourth largest economy in the world is still part of the USA!
Sharing with gratitude, joy, and triumph.
Virginia passed a bill that allows vet to declaw if they say so. We don’t count that one.
The complete text of the Virginia law is as follows:
§ 54.1-3814. Declawing cats; prohibition.
A. As used in this section:
“Cat” means any domesticated species of the family Felidae and does not include any wild or nonnative species of the family Felidae.
“Declawing procedure” means (i) an onychectomy, a dactylectomy, a phalangectomy, or any other procedure that removes a portion of the paw or digit of a cat in order to remove a claw; (ii) a tendonectomy or any other procedure that cuts or modifies the tendon of the limb, paw, or digit of a cat in order to prohibit the normal movement of a claw; or (iii) any procedure that prevents the normal functioning of one or more claws of a cat. “Declawing procedure” does not include nail filing, nail trimming, or the placement of temporary nail caps on one or more claws of a cat.
“Therapeutic purpose” means any action intended (i) to address an existing or recurring infection, disease, injury, or abnormal condition in an animal’s claw, nail bed, or toe bone that jeopardizes the animal’s health, and for which addressing the infection, disease, injury, or abnormal condition is a medical necessity, as documented by a licensed veterinarian, or (ii) to protect the owner’s life or health, as documented by a licensed physician, when such owner has been diagnosed with an infection, disease, disorder, or similar condition that could reasonably be expected to worsen if such owner were to be scratched by a cat. For purposes of this definition, “owner” includes members of the owner’s household. “Therapeutic purpose” does not include any action performed for cosmetic or aesthetic reasons or reasons of convenience in the keeping or handling of a cat.
B. It is unlawful for any person engaged in the practice of veterinary medicine to perform a declawing procedure on a cat, except such person may perform such a procedure if it is necessary for a therapeutic purpose.
2024, c. 748.
Laws must be made on this issue. As long as vets offer to declaw, there will be owners who elect to have it done–not to mention landlords who require their tenants to have their cats declawed! This is a real and often ignored issue—we encountered prospective tenants’ agreements that required just that back when we were apartment-hunting.
Would these same individuals also want all of their puppy’s teeth pulled because he chews too much? What would we think of a vet who offers this procedure, or a landlord who asks it of their tenants?