Maybe by a grossly abused statute, but as much as I despise the "slippery slope" argument, we've long since arrived. I don't think the case law on the books could have foreseen someone attempting to bring a fucking peacock, and the significant difference between a blind person bringing a service dog aboard, and an insufferable 20-something chick bringing her pet duck aboard is an incalculable chasm. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the emotional support animal claim requires no documentation, and in fact in some contexts, it's illegal to ask for that (I know it's not the case in real estate, in which I'm familiar, but no travel accommodations), which is why someone can just buy a harness on amazon and make wild claims to get their animal to fly for free.
Honestly, I don't blame the people doing it, I blame the regulators and the lawyers. Who WOULDN'T fly their animal for free if they knew that they would basically get away with it? Well, a lot of people who don't have an inkling of consideration for others, which is many. These people are like children, exploring their boundaries, and we need to establish them, like their parents didn't.
