The Fair Housing Act: Legal Overview

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) was enacted “to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair
housing throughout the United States.” The original 1968 Act prohibited discrimination on the
basis of “race, color, religion, or national origin” in the sale or rental of housing, the financing of
housing, or the provision of brokerage services. In 1974, the act was amended to add sex
discrimination to the list of prohibited activities. Likewise, in 1988 the act was amended to
prohibit discrimination on the additional grounds of physical and mental handicap, as well as
familial status. Although the FHA has been amended by a series of smaller laws in recent years,
there has not been a major overhaul of the act since 1988.
The FHA may be enforced in varying ways by the Attorney General, the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), and by victims of discrimination. The act’s coverage has been
extended to “residential real estate-related transactions,” which include both the “making [and]
purchasing of loans ... secured by residential real estate [and] the selling, brokering, or appraising
of residential real property.” Thus, the provisions of the FHA extend to the secondary mortgage
market.
In general, the FHA applies to all sorts of housing, public and private, including single family
homes, apartments, condominiums, mobile homes, and others. However, the act includes some
exemptions. The FHA does not “limit[] the applicability of any reasonable local, State, or Federal
restrictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling.”
Currently, no bills to amend the FHA have been introduced in the 110^th Congress. This report will
be updated as warranted.

I. Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
II. Housing Practices in Which Discrimination Is Prohibited.........................................................2
Disparate Impact Discrimination..............................................................................................4
III. Familial Discrimination and Housing for Older Persons..........................................................6
IV. Discrimination Based on Handicap...........................................................................................7
Group Homes and Zoning Restrictions.....................................................................................9
V. Enforcement of the Fair Housing Act.......................................................................................12
Enforcement by the Secretary.................................................................................................12
Enforcement by the Attorney General.....................................................................................14
Enforcement by Private Persons.............................................................................................14
Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................14

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) was enacted “to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair ²
housing throughout the United States.” The original 1968 Act prohibited discrimination on the
basis of “race, color, religion, or national origin” in the sale or rental of housing, the financing of ³
housing, or the provision of brokerage services. In 1974, the act was amended to add sex ⁴
discrimination to the list of prohibited activities. Likewise, in 1988 the act was amended to
prohibit discrimination on the additional grounds of physical and mental handicap, as well as ⁵
familial status. Although the FHA has been amended by a series of smaller laws in recent years,
there has not been a major overhaul of the act since 1988. Currently, no bills to amend the FHA ^th
have been introduced in the 110 Congress.
The FHA may be enforced by the Attorney General, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), and by victims of discrimination. (For more information on the
enforcement of the act, see the “Enforcement of the Fair Housing Act” section of this report.) The
act’s coverage has been extended to “residential real estate-related transactions,” which include
both the “making [and] purchasing of loans ... secured by residential real estate [and] the selling, ⁶
brokering, or appraising of residential real property.” Thus, the provisions of the FHA extend to ⁷
the secondary mortgage market.
In general, the FHA applies to all sorts of housing, public and private, including single family
homes, apartments, condominiums, mobile homes, and others. However, the act includes some
exemptions. For one, it does not apply to single family homes that are rented or sold by a private
owner who owns no more than three single family homes at the same time, without the use of a ⁸
real estate agent, provided that certain other conditions are met.
Additionally, religious groups and nonprofit entities run by religious groups are not prevented by
the act “from limiting the sale, rental, or occupancy of dwellings that it owns or operates for other
than a commercial purpose to persons of the same religion, or from giving preferences to such
persons, unless membership in such religion is restricted on account of race, color, or national ⁹
origin.” The act also does not prevent private clubs “from limiting the rental or occupancy of []
lodgings to its members or from giving preference to its members” if those lodgings are not being ¹⁰
run for a commercial purpose. “Housing for older persons,” as the term is defined by the act, are

¹^T^h^is^r^e^por^{t w}^a^s^pr^e^v^ious^ly^upda^t^e^{d by}^K^a^m^ila^{h M. H}^o^lde^r^,^w^{ho w}^a^s^f^o^r^m^e^r^l^y^a^le^gⁱ^s^l^a^tive^a^ttorⁿ^e^y^w^{ith the}
^A^m^e^r^ic^aⁿ^Law^Dⁱ^vⁱ^sⁱ^{on. It w}^{ill b}^e^upda^te^{d a}^s^w^a^rra^nte^d^.
²^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰¹^{. T}^h^e^FH^A^,⁴²^U^.^S.C^.^§§³⁶⁰¹^et^seq^.^{, w}^a^{s o}^r^igⁱⁿ^a^lly^eⁿ^a^c^t^e^d^a^s^T^itle^V^III^o^f^th^e^Civ^{il Rig}^h^{ts A}^c^{t o}^f
¹⁹⁶^8.
³⁴²^U^.^S^.^C^.^§§³⁶⁰⁴^-⁰⁶^.
⁴^P^.^L^.^93-³⁸^3.
⁵^P^.^L^.¹⁰^0-⁴³⁰^.
⁶^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁵^.
⁷^Se^e^,²⁴^C^.^F.^R^.^§¹⁰^0.¹²⁵
⁸^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰³⁽^b)⁽¹⁾^.^O^t^he^r^r^e^quir^e^m^e^nts^inc^l^ude^the^c^o^ndi^tioⁿ^tha^t^the^ho^us^e^be^s^o^ld^or^r^e^nte^d^w^itho^u^{t a}^br^ok^e^r
^an^d^w^ith^ou^{t ad}^vertisin^g.^H^o^w^e^v^e^r^,^{HUD regu}^latioⁿ^s^t^h^{at im}^p^l^em^en^t^th^{e F}^H^A^p^r^o^v^id^{e t}^h^{at t}^h^{e exe}^m^p^tioⁿ^s^s^p^ecifⁱ^edⁱⁿ
^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰³⁽^b)^d^o^{not a}^pply^{to a}^d^v^e^r^tis^ing^.^Iⁿ^o^t^he^r^w^o^r^d^s^,^a^d^v^e^r^tis^ing^tha^tⁱⁿ^dic^a^t^e^s^a^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tor^y^pr^e^f^e^r^eⁿ^c^e
^or^lim^ita^tion^is^pr^ohi^bite^d^e^v^eⁿ^w^h^eⁿ^s^u^c^h^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tion^its^e^l^f^isⁿ^o^t.^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.¹⁰⁽^c⁾^.
⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^a⁾^.
¹⁰^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^a⁾^.

exempted from the FHA’s proscription of discrimination on the basis of familial status. In other ¹¹
words, “housing for older persons” may exclude families with children. (For more information
on housing for older persons, see the “Familial Discrimination and Housing for Older Persons”
section of this report).
Finally, the FHA does not “limit[] the applicability of any reasonable local, State, or Federal ¹²
restrictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling.”
Concerned that occupancy limits may conflict with the prohibition against familial status
discrimination, Congress enacted section 589 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility ¹³
Act of 1998. This legislation required HUD to adopt the standards specified in the March 20, ¹⁴
1991 Memorandum from the General Counsel, which states that housing owners and managers
have discretion to “implement reasonable occupancy requirements based on factors such as the ¹⁵
number and size of sleeping areas or bedrooms and the overall size of the housing unit.” HUD
concluded that “an occupancy policy of two persons in a bedroom, as a general rule, is ¹⁶
reasonable” under the FHA. (For more information about state and local restrictions on
occupancy limits, see the “Group Homes” section of this report.)

The FHA prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial
status, or national origin in the sale or rental of housing, the financing of housing, the provision of
brokerage services, or in residential real estate-related transactions. The HUD regulations
elaborate upon the types of housing practices in which discrimination is prohibited and provide ¹⁷
illustrations of such practices. Under the regulations, the housing practices in which discrim-¹⁸
ination is prohibited include the sale or rental of a dwelling; the provision of services or ¹⁹
facilities in connection with the sale or rental of a dwelling; other conduct which makes ²⁰²¹
dwellings unavailable to persons; steering; advertising or publishing notices with regard to the

¹¹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)^.
¹²^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽¹⁾^.
¹³^P^.^L.¹⁰⁵^-²⁷^6,^{§ 58}⁹^.
¹⁴^P^.^L.¹⁰⁵^-²⁷^6,^{§ 58}⁹^.
¹⁵^Se^e^{, 6}³^Fe^d^.^R^e^g^.⁷⁰^,9⁸²^{, 7}⁰^,⁹⁸⁴⁽^D^e^c^e^m^b^e^r^{18, 1}⁹⁹⁸⁾^,^w^h^ic^{h a}^d^o^p^te^{d t}^h^e¹⁹⁹¹^Me^m^o^r^a^ndum^.
¹⁶^Id^.
¹⁷^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^P^a^r^t¹⁰^0.
¹⁸²⁴^C^.^F^.^R.^§¹⁰⁰^.⁶⁰^.^P^r^ohⁱ^bⁱ^t^e^d^a^c^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^uⁿ^d^e^{r t}^hⁱ^s^sectⁱ^oⁿⁱⁿ^cl^ud^{e “(1}⁾^[^f^]^aⁱ^lⁱⁿ^g^t^o^accep^t^o^r^coⁿ^sⁱ^d^er^a^bona^fⁱ^de^of^f^e^r
^{... (}²⁾^[^r^]^e^f^u^sing^{to se}^ll^{or re}^nt^a^d^w^e^lling^[^]^{, or}^to^ne^g^o^tia^te^f^o^{r a}^sa^le^{or re}^nta^l^{... (}³⁾^[ⁱ^]^m^posiⁿ^g^dif^f^e^re^{nt sa}^le^{s pric}^e^{s o}^r
^re^nta^l^c^h^a^r^g^e^{s f}^o^{r the}^sa^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^{... (4)}^[^u^]^sⁱⁿ^g^dif^f^e^re^{nt q}^u^a^lif^ic^a^{tion c}^r^ite^ria^{or a}^pplⁱ^c^a^{tions ..}^{. or}⁽⁵⁾
^[^e^]^v^ictin^g^ten^aⁿ^t^s^b^ecau^{se o}^f^th^eir^{race, co}^lo^{r, relig}^ioⁿ^,^sex^,^h^aⁿ^dⁱ^ca^p^,^f^a^m^{ilial statu}^s^{, o}^rⁿ^a^tioⁿ^a^l^o^r^igⁱⁿ^...^.”
¹⁹^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.^65.^Suc^h^dⁱ^s^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tor^y^c^onduc^t^inc^l^ude^s^“⁽¹⁾^[^u^]^s^ing^dif^f^e^r^e^{nt pr}^ov^is^ionsⁱⁿ^le^a^s^e^s^or^c^oⁿ^t^r^a^c^t^s^of
^sa^le^{... (2)}^[^f^]^aⁱ^ling^or^de^la^yⁱ^ng^m^a^inte^na^nc^e^{or re}^pa^{irs of}^...^dw^e^lling^s^{; (3)}^[^f^]^a^ili^ng^to^pro^c^e^{ss a}ⁿ^of^fe^{r f}^o^{r the}^sa^le^or
^re^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^{or to}^c^o^m^m^unic^a^t^e^aⁿ^of^f^e^{r a}^c^c^u^ra^te^l^y^...⁽⁴⁾^[^l^]ⁱ^m^iting^the^use^of^priv^ile^g^e^{s, se}^r^v^ic^e^s^{or f}^a^c^ilitie^{s in}
^coⁿⁿ^ectioⁿ^w^ith^t^h^{e sale o}^r^ren^t^al^o^f^{a d}^w^ellin^g^b^ecau^{se o}^f^rac^e^{, co}^lo^{r, relig}^ioⁿ^,^sex^,^h^aⁿ^d^icap^,^f^a^m^ili^{al statu}^s^{, o}^r
^na^tio^na^{l orig}ⁱⁿ^...^or⁽⁵⁾^de^ny^ing^{or lim}^iting^s^e^rv^ic^es^{or f}^a^c^ilitie^s^{in c}^onne^c^tio^{n w}^{ith t}^h^e^s^a^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^,
^b^ecau^{se a p}^e^rsoⁿ^f^aⁱ^l^e^d^o^r^ref^u^{sed t}^o^p^r^o^vⁱ^d^{e sexu}^al^f^a^vo^rs.^”
²⁰^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.⁷⁰⁽^d)^.^Suc^h^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tor^y^c^onduc^t^inc^l^u^d^e^s^“⁽¹⁾^[^d^]ⁱ^s^c^ha^r^g^ing^or^ta^kⁱ^ng^o^t^he^r^a^d^v^e^r^s^e^a^c^{tion a}^g^aⁱ^ns^t
^aⁿ^e^m^plo^y^e^e^,^brok^e^r^{, or a}^g^eⁿ^{t be}^c^a^us^e^he^{or s}^h^e^re^f^u^s^e^d^{to pa}^rticⁱ^p^a^t^e^{in a}^dⁱ^s^c^rimⁱ^na^tory^pra^c^tic^e^[^o^r^]^{... (}²⁾
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

selling or renting of a dwelling;²² misrepresentations as to the availability of a dwelling;²³ ²⁴
blockbusting; and the denial of “access to membership or participation in any multiple-listing
service, real estate brokers association, or other service ... relating to the business of selling or ²⁵
renting dwellings.”
Yet another provision makes it unlawful to “coerce intimidate, threaten, or interfere with” ²⁶
individuals for exercising, or aiding others in the exercise of their rights under the FHA.

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^[^e^]^m^ploy^ing^c^ode^s^or^ot^he^r^de^vⁱ^c^e^s^{to s}^e^g^r^e^g^a^t^e^or^r^e^je^c^t^a^pplic^aⁿ^t^s^{, pur}^c^h^a^s^e^r^s^or^r^e^nte^r^s^..^{. or}^r^e^f^u^sⁱ^ng^to^de^a^l^w^ith
^c^e^r^ta^{in re}^a^l^e^s^ta^te^brok^e^r^s^{or a}^g^eⁿ^ts^{... (}³⁾^[d^]^e^ny^ing^{or de}^la^yⁱ^ng^the^proc^e^s^sⁱ^ng^of^aⁿ^a^p^plic^a^tio^{n m}^a^de^by^a^purc^h^a^s^e^r
^{or re}^nte^r^{or re}^f^u^sⁱ^ng^{to a}^p^prov^e^s^u^c^h^a^pe^rs^oⁿ^f^o^{r oc}^c^u^pa^nc^y^{in a}^c^oope^ra^tiv^e^{or c}^oⁿ^dom^inium^...^[or^]⁽⁴⁾^[^r^]^e^f^u^sⁱ^ng^to
^p^r^o^v^id^{e m}^uⁿⁱ^cip^a^{l serv}^{ices o}^r^p^r^o^p^erty^o^r^h^azardⁱⁿ^su^ran^{ce f}^o^{r d}^w^ellin^g^s^o^r^p^r^o^v^idⁱⁿ^g^su^ch^serv^ices^o^rⁱⁿ^s^u^ran^ce
^dⁱ^f^f^eren^tl^y^b^ecau^{se o}^f^{race, co}^lo^{r, relig}^ioⁿ^,^sex^,^h^aⁿ^dⁱ^cap^,^f^a^m^{ilial statu}^s^{, o}^rⁿ^a^ti^oⁿ^a^l^o^r^igⁱⁿ^.”
²¹^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.⁷⁰⁽^c⁾^.^Pr^o^h^ib^ite^{d s}^t^e^e^r^ing^pr^a^c^tic^e^s^inc^l^u^d^e^“⁽¹⁾^[^d^]ⁱ^s^c^our^a^g^ing^aⁿ^y^pe^r^s^{on f}^r^om^ins^p^e^c^ting^,
^purc^h^a^s^ing^,^{or re}ⁿ^ting^a^dw^e^lling^{... (}²⁾^[^d^]ⁱ^sc^oura^g^ing^th^e^purc^h^a^s^e^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^...^by^e^x^a^g^g^e^ra^ting
^dra^w^ba^ck^s^{or f}^a^iling^{to inf}^o^rm^aⁿ^y^pe^rs^{on of}^de^sⁱ^ra^ble^f^e^a^t^ure^s^of^{a dw}^e^lling^{or of}^a^c^o^m^m^unity^{, ne}^ighbo^rh^oo^{d, o}^r
^de^v^e^lopm^eⁿ^{t ... (3)}^[^c^]om^m^unic^a^ting^{to a}ⁿ^y^pros^pe^c^tiv^e^purc^h^a^s^e^r^t^h^a^t^he^{or s}^h^e^w^oul^{d n}^o^t^be^c^o^m^f^o^r^ta^ble^{or c}^o^m^p^a^t^-
^ible^w^{ith e}^x^is^ting^re^sⁱ^de^nts^of^a^com^m^unity^{, ne}^ig^hborho^od^or^de^v^e^lopm^eⁿ^{t ...}^[or^]⁽⁴⁾^[^a^]^s^sⁱ^gⁿ^ing^aⁿ^y^pe^rs^{on to a}
^p^a^rtⁱ^c^u^l^{ar sect}ⁱ^o^{n o}^f^{a co}^mm^uⁿⁱ^t^y^,ⁿ^eⁱ^g^h^b^o^r^ho^od^o^r^d^e^vel^o^p^m^en^t^,^{or t}^o^a^p^a^rtⁱ^c^u^l^{ar f}^l^o^o^r^o^f^{a b}^uⁱ^l^dⁱ^ng,^b^ecau^{se o}^f^race,
^c^o^{lor, re}^ligⁱ^on,^se^x^,^ha^ndic^a^p^{, f}^a^m^ilia^{l sta}^t^{us, or na}^ti^ona^l^orig^in.”
²²^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.^75.^Dⁱ^s^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tor^y^a^d^v^e^r^tis^em^eⁿ^ts^orⁿ^o^tic^e^s^inc^l^u^d^e^“⁽¹⁾^[^u^]^sⁱⁿ^g^w^o^r^d^s^,^p^h^r^a^s^e^s^,^ph^oto^g^r^a^phs^,
^illustra^ti^{ons, sy}^m^{bols or f}^o^rm^s^whic^{h c}^o^nv^e^y^tha^t^dw^e^lling^s^a^r^e^a^v^a^ila^ble^or^not^a^v^a^ila^ble^{to a}^pa^rt^ic^ula^r^g^r^ou^{p of}
^pe^r^s^ons^.^{.. (}²⁾^[^e^]^x^pr^e^s^sⁱ^ng^{to a}^g^eⁿ^ts^{, br}^ok^e^r^s^,^e^m^ploy^e^e^s^{, pr}^os^pe^c^tiv^e^s^e^lle^r^s^or^r^e^nte^r^s^or^aⁿ^y^othe^r^p^e^r^s^ons^a
^p^r^ef^eren^ce^f^o^{r o}^r^lⁱ^mⁱ^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^on^any^p^u^r^ch^{aser o}^r^ren^t^{er .}^.^.⁽³⁾^[^s^]^e^l^e^c^tⁱⁿ^{g m}^e^dⁱ^{a o}^r^l^o^catⁱ^oⁿ^s^f^o^{r ad}^vertⁱ^sⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^{e sal}^e^o^r
^re^nta^l^of^dw^e^lling^s^w^h^ic^{h de}^ny^partic^ula^r^s^e^gm^eⁿ^ts^of^the^ho^us^ing^m^a^rk^e^t^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion a}^bout^h^ousⁱⁿ^g^op^port^uⁿ^itie^s^...
^[or^]⁽⁴⁾^[^r^]^e^f^u^sing^to^pu^{blish a}^d^v^e^rtisin^g^f^o^{r the}^sa^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^dw^e^lling^s^{or re}^q^u^iriⁿ^g^dif^f^e^r^e^{nt c}^h^a^r^g^e^{s or te}^rm^{s f}^o^r
^su^ch^ad^v^e^rtisin^g^b^ecau^{se o}^f^{race, co}^lo^{r, relig}ⁱ^oⁿ^,^sex^,^h^aⁿ^dⁱ^cap^{, f}^a^m^{ilial statu}^s^{, o}^rⁿ^a^ti^oⁿ^a^l^o^r^igⁱⁿ^.”
²³^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.^80.^I^l^l^u^s^t^r^a^tio^ns^of^this^pr^ohi^bite^d^a^c^tiv^ity^inc^l^ude^“⁽¹⁾^[ⁱ^]ⁿ^dic^a^ting^t^h^r^o^ug^{h w}^o^r^d^s^o^r^c^ond^uc^{t t}^h^a^t^a
^dw^e^lling^w^h^ic^{h is a}^v^a^ila^ble^f^o^{r inspe}^c^tion,^sa^le^{, or re}ⁿ^t^a^l^ha^s^be^eⁿ^sold^{or re}ⁿ^t^e^d^.^{.. (}²⁾^[^r^]^e^pre^s^eⁿ^ti^ng^tha^t^[^a^pe^rsoⁿ
^c^a^{nnot re}^{nt or}^p^u^rc^ha^s^e^a^dw^e^lling^b^ecau^se]^co^ven^aⁿ^t^{s or o}^t^h^e^{r d}^e^e^d^,^t^r^u^s^t^,^o^r^l^{ease p}^r^o^vⁱ^sⁱ^oⁿ^s^w^hⁱ^c^{h p}^u^r^p^o^r^t^t^o^rest^ri^ct
^the^sa^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^...⁽³⁾^[^e^]ⁿ^f^o^rc^ing^c^o^v^e^na^nts^{or ot}^he^r^de^e^d^{, tr}^ust,^{or le}^a^s^e^prov^isi^{ons w}^h^ic^{h pre}^c^l^ude^t^h^e
^sa^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^{to a}ⁿ^y^pe^rson^...⁽⁴⁾^[^l^]im^iting^inf^o^rm^a^tⁱ^on,^by^w^o^{rd or c}^oⁿ^duc^t,^re^g^a^rding^suita^bly^pric^e^d
^d^w^ellin^g^s^...^[^o^r^]⁽⁵⁾^[p^]^r^o^v^idⁱⁿ^g^f^a^{lse o}^rⁱⁿ^accu^{rate in}^f^o^rm^a^tioⁿ^reg^a^rdⁱⁿ^g^th^{e av}^ailab^ility^o^f^{a d}^w^elliⁿ^g^f^o^{r sale o}^r
^ren^t^{al to}^aⁿ^y^p^e^rsoⁿ^...^b^ecau^{se o}^f^{race, co}^lo^{r, relig}^ioⁿ^,^sex^,^h^aⁿ^dⁱ^ca^p^,^f^a^m^{ilial statu}^s^{, o}^rⁿ^a^tioⁿ^a^l^o^r^igⁱⁿ^.”
²⁴²⁴^C^.^F^.^R.^§¹⁰⁰^.⁸⁵⁽^b⁾^.^T^h^{e HUD regu}^latioⁿ^s^d^e^fⁱⁿ^e^“b^lo^ckb^u^s^tiⁿ^g^{” to}^m^ean^“^f^o^r^p^r^o^f^it,^t^oⁱⁿ^du^{ce o}^r^attem^p^{t to}
^ind^u^c^e^a^pe^rson^{to se}^ll^{or re}^{nt a}^d^w^e^lling^b^y^re^pre^s^eⁿ^ta^{tions re}^g^a^rding^the^eⁿ^try^or^pr^ospe^c^tiv^e^eⁿ^try^into^the
^ne^ig^hbor^ho^od^of^a^pe^r^s^on^or^pe^r^s^ons^of^a^pa^r^tic^ula^r^r^{ace, co}^lo^r,^reli^gⁱ^oⁿ^,^sex^,^f^a^m^{ilial statu}^s^{, o}^rⁿ^a^tioⁿ^a^{l o}^r^igⁱⁿ^o^r^w^ith^a
^ha^ndic^a^p^{. 2}⁴^C^.^F.R^.^{§ 1}⁰⁰^.⁸⁵⁽^a⁾^.^For^bloc^k^bus^tⁱ^ng^to^be^e^s^ta^blis^he^{d, p}^r^of^{it d}^o^e^s^no^{t ha}^v^e^to^be^r^e^a^lⁱ^z^e^d^{, a}^s^long^a^s
^pr^of^{it w}^a^s^a^f^a^c^t^or^f^o^r^eⁿ^g^a^gⁱ^ng^{in the}^a^c^tiv^ity^{. 24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.8⁵⁽^b)^.
²⁵^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.^90.^Suc^h^pr^oh^ibi^t^e^d^a^c^tions^inc^l^u^d^e^“⁽¹⁾^[^s^]^e^tti^ng^dif^f^e^r^eⁿ^{t f}^e^e^s^f^o^r^a^c^c^e^s^s^{to or}^m^e^m^b^e^r^s^h^{ip in a}
^m^u^ltip^{le listin}^g^serv^{ice ... (2}⁾^[^d^]^eⁿ^yⁱⁿ^g^o^r^lim^itin^g^b^eⁿ^e^f^{its accr}^uⁱⁿ^g^to^m^e^m^b^{ers in}^{a real estate b}^r^o^k^{ers’ o}^r^g^aⁿⁱ^zatioⁿ
^{... (}³⁾^[ⁱ^]^m^pos^ing^dⁱ^f^f^e^r^eⁿ^{t s}^t^a^nda^rds^{or c}^r^ite^ria^f^o^{r m}^e^m^b^e^r^s^h^{ip in a}^re^a^l^-e^s^t^a^t^e^s^a^le^s^{or re}^nta^l^org^a^niz^a^tion^...^[^o^r^]⁽⁴⁾
^[^e^]^s^ta^blis^hing^g^e^og^r^a^phic^bou^nda^rⁱ^e^s^or^of^fⁱ^c^e^loc^a^{tion or}^r^e^sⁱ^de^nc^e^r^e^quir^e^m^e^nts^f^o^r^a^c^c^e^s^s^{to or}^m^e^m^b^e^r^s^h^{ip or}
^p^a^rticip^atioⁿⁱⁿ^an^y^m^u^ltip^{le listin}^g^serv^ic^e,^{real estate b}^r^o^k^{ers’ o}^r^g^aⁿⁱ^zatioⁿ^o^r^o^t^h^e^{r serv}^{ice ...}^b^ecau^{se o}^f^{race, co}^lo^r,
^re^lig^{ion, se}^x^,^haⁿ^d^ic^a^p^{, f}^a^m^ilia^{l st}^a^t^{us, or}^na^tio^na^l^orig^in.”
²⁶^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁷^.^Viola^tⁱ^ons^of^this^s^e^c^tion^inc^l^ude^“⁽¹⁾^c^o^e^r^cⁱ^ng^a^pe^r^s^{on .}^{.. t}^o^de^ny^or^lim^{it the}^be^ne^f^its^pr^ov^ide^d
^tha^t^pe^rs^oⁿⁱⁿ^c^o^nne^c^tio^{n w}^{ith t}^h^e^s^a^le^{or re}^nta^l^of^a^dw^e^lling^{or in}^c^onne^c^tio^{n w}^{ith a}^re^sⁱ^deⁿ^tia^{l re}^a^l^e^s^ta^te^-re^la^te^d
^traⁿ^s^a^c^{tion .}^{.. (}²⁾^[^t^]hre^a^t^eⁿ^ing^,ⁱⁿ^tim^ida^ting^,^{or i}ⁿ^te^rf^e^r^ing^w^{ith pe}^r^s^onsⁱⁿ^theⁱ^r^eⁿ^joy^m^eⁿ^{t of}^a^dw^e^l^lⁱ^ng^{... (}³⁾
^[^t^]h^reat^enⁱⁿ^{g an}^em^p^l^o^y^{ee o}^r^ageⁿ^t^wⁱ^t^h^dⁱ^smⁱ^ssal^o^r^ad^{verse act}ⁱ^oⁿ^,^{or t}^a^kiⁿ^g^su^ch^a^d^{verse e}^m^p^l^o^y^men^t^actⁱ^oⁿ^,^f^o^{r an}^y
^eff^o^{rt to}^{assist a p}^e^rsoⁿ^seekⁱⁿ^g^a^{ccess to}^th^{e sale o}^r^ren^t^al^o^f^{a d}^w^ellin^g^o^r^seekⁱⁿ^g^{access to}^an^y^re^sⁱ^d^eⁿ^{tial real estate-}
^related^tran^sactioⁿ^{... (}⁴⁾^[ⁱ^]n^tim^id^atin^g^o^r^t^h^reatenⁱⁿ^g^an^y^p^e^rsoⁿ^b^ecau^{se th}^{at p}^e^rsoⁿ^{is en}^g^a^gⁱⁿ^gⁱⁿ^a^c^tiv^{ities d}^e^sigⁿ^ed
^{to m}^a^ke^othe^r^pe^r^s^oⁿ^s^a^w^a^r^e^of^[^t^he^ir^f^a^ir^housⁱⁿ^g^rⁱ^g^h^ts^,^or^]^..^{. (}⁵⁾^[^r^]^e^ta^lia^ting^a^g^aⁱ^ns^{t a}ⁿ^y^pe^r^s^on^b^ecau^{se t}^h^at^p^e^rsoⁿ
^h^a^{s m}^a^d^e^{a co}^m^p^l^aⁱⁿ^t^,^t^e^stⁱ^fⁱ^e^d^,^assi^st^ed^,^o^r^p^a^rtⁱ^cⁱ^p^at^edⁱⁿ^a^p^r^o^ceedⁱⁿ^{g un}^d^e^r^t^h^{e F}^aⁱ^r^H^o^u^sⁱⁿ^{g A}^c^t^.^{” 2}⁴^C.^F^.^R.^§
¹⁰⁰^.4^00.

Finally, as noted above, the FHA applies to public as well as private housing. As a result, a
number of lawsuits over the years have challenged the fair housing practices of state and local
housing authorities and even HUD itself, particularly with respect to discrimination in low-²⁷
income public housing. In one recent case, African-American residents of public housing in
Baltimore sued HUD and various local agencies for race discrimination, and the court ultimately
held that HUD had violated the FHA “by failing adequately to consider regional approaches to ²⁸
ameliorate racial segregation in public housing in the Baltimore Region.”
In addition to outlawing direct discrimination against individuals on the prohibited grounds
mentioned above, the federal courts have generally agreed that “under some circumstances a ²⁹
violation of section 3604(a) can be established by a showing of discriminatory effect without a ³⁰
showing of discriminatory intent.” The Seventh Circuit justified such a holding in the following
way:
^{a requ}^irem^eⁿ^{t t}^h^{at th}^{e plai}ⁿ^tⁱ^f^f^prov^{e dis}^c^rimⁱⁿ^a^tor^yⁱⁿ^teⁿ^t^{before re}^lⁱ^e^f^c^aⁿ^b^e^g^r^aⁿ^t^e^d^uⁿ^d^e^r
^th^{e s}^t^at^u^t^{e is}^o^f^ten^{a bu}^rden^t^h^{at is}ⁱ^m^pos^sⁱ^{ble to s}^a^tis^fy^{.... A s}^t^{rict f}^o^cus^onⁱⁿ^teⁿ^t^per^m^it^s
^r^a^cⁱ^a^l^dⁱ^s^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tⁱ^o^{n t}^o^go^unp^uni^s^h^e^dⁱⁿ^t^h^e^a^b^s^e^nc^e^o^f^e^vⁱ^d^eⁿ^c^e^o^f^o^v^e^r^t^bⁱ^gotr^y^...^[^w^hⁱ^c^h^]³¹
^ha^{s b}^e^c^o^m^e^ha^r^d^e^r^t^o^fi^nd^.
A practice that, while often not intentional discrimination directed at individual members of a
minority group but that may have a disparate impact on such persons, is “redlining,” which is a
business’s refusal to provide loans, home insurance coverage, etc., based on the characteristics of ³²
a neighborhood in which the home is located. The courts have consistently held that redlining
violates the FHA. The federal court in Dunn v. Midwestern Indemnity Mid-American Fire and ³³
Casualty Co. explained it this way:
^th^{e a}^v^ailab^ilit^y^o^f^ap^p^r^o^p^r^iat^eⁱⁿ^s^u^r^aⁿ^{ce is}^{a n}^ece^ssar^y^p^r^ed^{icate to}^th^{e a}^v^ailab^ilit^y^o^f
^fⁱⁿ^aⁿ^cⁱⁿ^g^,^an^d^fⁱⁿ^aⁿ^c^ial^assⁱ^staⁿ^{ce is a p}^r^ecoⁿ^d^itioⁿ^to^sec^u^rⁱⁿ^g^th^{e a}^v^ailab^ilit^y^o^f^ad^eq^u^a^te
^ho^usⁱⁿ^g.^Si^nc^e^a^dⁱ^sc^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^t^o^r^y^d^eⁿⁱ^a^l^o^f^fi^na^ncⁱ^ng^vi^o^l^a^t^e^s^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^a⁾^,^a^dⁱ^sc^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^t^o^r^y³⁴
^f^aⁱ^l^u^r^{e or ref}^u^s^a^l^t^o^provⁱ^d^{e pr}^opert^yⁱⁿ^su^ran^{ce on}^d^w^el^lⁱⁿ^g^s^al^s^o^m^u^s^t^vⁱ^ol^at^{e § 3604(a).}

²⁷^S^ee,^e.^g^.^{, N}^.^A^.^A^.^C^.^P^.^v^.^Se^c^’^y^of^H^ous^{. a}ⁿ^{d U}^r^ba^{n D}^e^v^{., 8}¹⁷^F.2^d¹⁴⁹⁽¹^st^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁸⁷⁾^.
²⁸^T^hom^ps^{on v}^.^U^.^{S. D}^e^p’^{t of}^H^o^us^{. a}^{nd U}^r^ba^{n D}^e^v^.,³⁴^{8 F.}^Su^pp^.2^d³⁹^8,⁵²^{4 (}^D^.^Md.^J^a^nua^r^y^{6, 2}⁰⁰⁵⁾^.
²⁹^T^h^{e t}^e^r^m^“dⁱ^s^cri^mⁱⁿ^at^o^r^y^e^f^f^e^ct^”ⁱ^s^u^s^edⁱⁿ^t^e^rch^aⁿ^g^eab^l^y^wⁱ^t^h^t^h^{e t}^e^r^m^“dⁱ^s^p^a^rat^eⁱ^m^p^act^.^”
³⁰^Me^{tro. H}^ous.^De^v^.^Corp.^v^.^Vill.^of^A^r^ling^t^{on He}^ig^{hts, 5}⁵⁸^F.2^d¹²^83,¹²⁹⁰⁽⁷^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁷⁷⁾^.
³¹^Id^.^Suc^h^a^ho^ldiⁿ^g^{is n}^o^{t lim}^ite^{d t}^o^dis^p^a^r^a^t^e^im^pa^c^t^{s on the}^ba^{sis o}^f^ra^c^e^.
³²^Se^e^{, 6}⁹^Fe^d^.^R^e^g^.⁶³^,7⁶⁰⁽^N^ov^e^m^be^r^{2, 20}⁰⁴⁾^.
³³⁴⁷^{2 F}^.^Su^pp^{. 1}¹⁰⁶⁽^S^.D^{. O}^hⁱ^o¹⁹⁷⁹⁾^.
³⁴^Id^.^a^t¹¹⁰⁹^{. 2}⁴^C.^F.R.^§¹⁰^0.7⁰^(d^{)(4). T}^h^e^FHA^doe^{s n}^o^t^e^x^plic^itly^a^ddre^{ss the}^issue^of^ho^usingⁱⁿ^su^ra^nc^e^,^but
^lan^g^u^a^{ge in}^§^§³⁶⁰⁴^and³⁶⁰⁵^o^f^th^{e act h}^a^{s b}^een^c^oⁿ^s^tr^u^e^d^t^o^app^l^y^toⁱⁿ^su^ran^ce.^{HUD regu}^latioⁿ^s^p^r^oh^ib^it^th^{e ref}^u^sal
^to^p^r^o^v^id^{e “p}^r^o^p^e^rty^o^r^h^azardⁱⁿ^s^u^ran^{ce f}^o^{r d}^w^ellin^g^s^o^r^p^r^o^v^idⁱⁿ^g^su^ch^.^{.. i}ⁿ^su^ran^{ce d}ⁱ^f^f^eren^tl^y^b^e^c^a^u^s^{e o}^f^{race, co}^lo^r,
^re^lig^{ion, se}^x^,^haⁿ^d^ic^a^p^{, f}^a^m^ilia^{l st}^a^t^{us, or}^na^tio^na^l^orig^in.”^S^ee,^e.^g^.^,^N^a^tionw^ide^Mu^{t. I}ⁿ^s^.^Co^{. v}^.^Cisⁿ^e^r^os^{, 5}²^F.^3d^th
¹³⁵^{1 (}⁶^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁵⁾^,^cert^.^d^eⁿⁱ^ed^,⁵¹^{6 U}^.^S^.¹¹⁴⁰⁽¹⁹⁹⁶⁾^.^Iⁿ^c^ontr^a^s^t^{, a}^f^e^de^r^a^{l dis}^t^rⁱ^c^t^c^our^{t ha}^s^he^ld^tha^t^the^FH^A^doe^s
ⁿ^o^t^p^r^o^hⁱ^b^it^dⁱ^scrimⁱⁿ^a^tioⁿⁱⁿ^coⁿⁿ^ectioⁿ^w^ith^m^o^rtg^a^g^e^dⁱ^sa^b^ilityⁱⁿ^su^ran^{ce, b}^ecau^{se §}³⁶⁰⁵^p^r^o^hⁱ^bⁱ^t^s^dⁱ^scrimⁱⁿ^a^tioⁿ
ⁱⁿ^t^h^{e p}^r^o^v^isioⁿ^o^f^h^o^u^sⁱⁿ^g^-related^“fⁱⁿ^an^{cial assistan}^{ce” a}ⁿ^d^m^o^rtg^a^g^e^dⁱ^sab^ilityⁱⁿ^su^ran^{ce, u}ⁿ^lik^e^p^r^o^p^erty^an^d^h^azard
ⁱⁿ^su^ran^ce,ⁱ^sⁿ^o^t^{a p}^r^erequⁱ^si^t^e^t^o^o^b^t^aiⁿⁱⁿ^g^fⁱⁿ^aⁿ^cⁱⁿ^{g and}^t^h^u^sⁱ^sⁿ^o^t^{a f}^o^rm^o^f^“^fⁱⁿ^an^ci^al^assi^st^an^ce.^”^Do^u^k^{as v.}^M^e^t^r^o^.
^Lⁱ^f^e^Ins^.^Co.,⁸⁸^{2 F}^.^S^u^p^p^.¹¹^{97 (}^D^.N^.H^{. 19}⁹⁵^).

Of course, not all policies and decisions that result in a disparate impact on a protected class are ³⁵
prohibited by the FHA. The decision in Thomas v. First Federal Savings Bank of Indiana
highlights the need for more than just a statistical discriminatory effect. In that case, black
homeowners claimed that the defendant financial institution had redlined the plaintiffs’
neighborhood when it refused the homeowners’ application for a second mortgage. The court
held:
^p^l^ain^tⁱ^f^f^s^’^stat^{istical e}^v^id^eⁿ^ce^{is n}^o^t^su^f^f^icieⁿ^t^{as a}^m^a^t^t^er^o^f^la^w^to^estab^lis^h^a^vⁱ^o^l^atioⁿ^o^f
^s^ectⁱ^oⁿ^3605.^P^l^aiⁿ^tⁱ^f^f^s^’^at^t^o^rⁿ^e^y^s^off^e^{red n}^o^ex^pl^an^atⁱ^oⁿ^of^t^h^e^m^e^aⁿⁱⁿ^g^of^t^h^es^e^fⁱ^gu^res^....
^A^l^t^h^o^u^gh^s^ectioⁿ^3605’^s^red-^lin^ing^proh^ibition^m^a^k^e^sⁱ^t^illeg^a^{l to}^dⁱ^scrⁱ^mⁱⁿ^a^{te o}ⁿ^t^h^{e b}^a^{sis o}^f
^certain^ch^ar^acteris^tics^o^f^t^h^e^plain^tⁱ^f^f’sⁿ^e^ig^h^borh^{ood (e.g}^{., race, color,}^relig^ion^,^s^e^x^or
ⁿ^a^tioⁿ^a^l^o^r^igⁱⁿ⁾^,^th^er^{e ar}^eⁿ^u^m^e^r^o^u^s^legⁱ^ti^m^a^te^busⁱⁿ^es^s^f^a^ctors^th^at^g^oⁱⁿ^{to a decis}ⁱ^oⁿ^t^o³⁶
^m^a^k^e^{a l}^o^aⁿ^w^hⁱ^c^h^{do n}^o^t^f^o^r^m^t^h^{e basi}^s^of^a^vⁱ^ol^atⁱ^oⁿ^uⁿ^d^e^r^s^ectⁱ^oⁿ^3605.
The courts, however, are not in agreement as to how to determine if a discriminatory effect
violates the act. Some courts apply a four-factor test originally set out in the Seventh Circuit’s
Village of Arlington Heights decision. These factors are:
⁽¹⁾^[^t^he^]^st^r^e^ngt^{h o}^f^t^h^e^p^l^aⁱ^ntⁱ^f^f’^{s st}^a^tⁱ^s^tⁱ^c^a^l^sho^wⁱⁿ^g;⁽²⁾^t^h^e^l^e^gi^tⁱ^ma^c^y^o^f^t^h^e^d^e^fe^nd^aⁿ^t^’^s
ⁱⁿ^ter^e^{st i}ⁿ^takⁱⁿ^g^th^{e actio}ⁿ^co^m^p^lain^ed^o^f^{; (}³⁾^so^m^eⁱⁿ^dⁱ^cati^oⁿ^—^w^h^ich^mⁱ^g^h^t^b^e^s^u^g^g^e^s^ti^v^e
^r^a^th^er^th^aⁿ^coⁿ^c^lu^si^v^e^—o^f^dⁱ^s^c^rⁱ^mⁱⁿ^a^to^r^yⁱⁿ^teⁿ^{t; a}ⁿ^d⁽⁴⁾^th^e^ex^ten^t^to^w^h^ich^r^e^lief^co^u^l^d^b^e
^o^b^t^ain^e^d^b^y^li^m^itiⁿ^gⁱⁿ^ter^f^er^en^{ce b}^y^{, r}^a^th^er^th^aⁿ^r^e^q^u^irⁱⁿ^g^p^o^s^itiv^{e r}^e^m^e^dⁱ^a^l^m^e^a^s^u^r^e^s^o^f^,^t^h^e³⁷
^def^eⁿ^d^ant^.
Other courts apply a burden-shifting regime to assess the validity of a disparate impact claim ³⁸
pursuant to the FHA. Yet there are some differences in the tests applied, even among the various
courts that apply burden-shifting schemes. All courts that use burden-shifting tests agree that the
burden is initially on the plaintiff to make a prima facie showing, generally with the use of
statistics, that a specific policy results in a disparate impact upon a protected class, and that upon
such a showing the burden shifts to the defendant to show that the policy was initiated for some ³⁹
nondiscriminatory, legitimate purpose. From there, some courts keep the onus on the defendant
to show there is not a less discriminatory alternative that would allow the defendant to meet the ⁴⁰
same legitimate purpose. Other courts, upon a defendant showing a nondiscriminatory,

³⁵⁶⁵^{3 F}^.^S^u^p^p^.¹³^{30 (}^N^.D^.^Iⁿ^d.¹⁹⁸⁷⁾^.
³⁶^Id^.^a^t¹³⁴⁰^{. In}^a^d^d^itio^{n t}^o^t^h^e^c^r^e^d^itw^orthine^ss^of^the^borr^o^w^e^{r, oth}^e^{r le}^g^iti^m^a^te^busine^{ss f}^a^c^t^{ors ra}^is^e^d^by^the^c^ourt
^inc^l^u^d^e^d^t^h^e^div^e^r^s^if^ic^a^{tion of}^the^de^f^e^nda^nt’^s^a^s^s^e^ts^a^{nd the}^s^a^la^bⁱ^l^ity^of^the^hom^e^,^the^s^e^c^{ond of}^w^h^ic^{h c}^oul^d^be
^a^f^f^e^c^t^e^d^by^c^h^a^r^ac^te^rⁱ^s^tic^s^of^the^ne^ig^hbor^ho^odⁱⁿ^w^h^ic^{h the}^hom^e^w^a^s^loc^a^t^e^d^.^Id^.
³⁷^P^h^il^lips^v^.^H^unte^r^T^r^a^ils^C^m^t^y^.^A^s^s^o^c^{., 6}⁸⁵^F.2^d¹⁸^4,¹⁸^9-¹^{90 (}⁷^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁸²⁾⁽^qu^otⁱⁿ^g^Vil^l^a^g^e^of^Ar^lⁱ^ngt^on^H^e^ights^,
⁵⁵⁸^F.^2d^a^t¹²⁹⁰⁾^.^S^{ee a}^l^so^{, H}^a^rtm^a^{n v}^.^G^r^e^e^nw^ic^{h Wa}^lk^H^o^m^e^o^w^ne^rs^’^A^s^s^o^c^{., Inc}^{., 7}¹^Fe^d^.^A^p^p^x^.¹³⁵^{, 1}³⁷⁽³^rd^Cir.
²⁰⁰³⁾^.
³⁸^Se^e^,^e.^g^.^{, G}^r^a^o^c^h^A^ssoc^.^{# 33}^{, L}^.^{P. v}^.^L^ouisv^ille^/Je^f^f^e^{rson Co}^uⁿ^ty^Me^{tro Hum}^a^{n Re}^la^{tions C}^o^m^’^e^e^,⁵⁰⁸^F.^3d³^66,
³⁷⁴⁽⁶^th^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰⁷⁾^;^A^f^f^o^r^d^a^b^le^H^ous^{. D}^e^v^.^C^o^r^p^{. v}^.^Cⁱ^ty^of^Fr^e^s^{no, 43}^{3 F}^.³^d¹¹⁸²^,¹¹^95-⁹⁶⁽⁹^th^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰⁶⁾^{; D}^a^r^s^t-^th
^W^e^bbe^T^e^na^{nt A}^s^s^’^{n B}^d^{. v}^.^St^{. L}^ouis^H^ous^{. A}^u^th^.,⁴¹^{7 F.}^3d⁸^98,⁹^01-^{02 (}⁸^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰⁵⁾^;^La^pⁱ^d^-^La^u^r^e^l^,^L.^L.^C^.^v.^rd
^Zoni^ng^B^d^.^of^A^d^jus^t^m^e^{nt of}^the^T^o^wⁿ^s^h^{ip of}^Sc^otc^h^Plaⁱ^ns^,²⁸^{4 F}^.^3d⁴⁴^2,⁴⁶^6-⁶⁷⁽³^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰²⁾^;^L^aⁿ^g^l^oⁱ^s^v.^st
^A^b^ing^{don H}^ous^{. A}^u^th^.,²⁰^{7 F.}^3d^43,⁵¹⁽¹^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰⁰⁾^;^H^uⁿ^tⁱⁿ^gt^{on B}^r^an^ch^,^NA^A^C^P^v.^To^wⁿ^o^f^Huⁿ^tⁱⁿ^gt^on^,⁸⁴⁴^F.^2d^nd
⁹²⁶^{, 9}³⁵^-³⁶⁽²^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁸⁸⁾^.
³⁹^Id^.
⁴⁰^Se^e^,^e.^g^.^,^Da^rst-Web^b^e^,⁴¹^{7 F}^.³^d^a^t⁹⁰^1-⁰²^.

legitimate purpose, shift the burden to the plaintiff to submit proof of a viable, less discriminatory ⁴¹
alternative.
Finally, there is a third group of courts that apply the burden-shifting framework, generally, but
look to the four-factor balancing test to determine if the plaintiff has met his or her original ⁴²
burden of establishing a prima facie disparate impact.
While there is a great deal of variation in how courts assess a disparate impact claim, one
common thread is that they are all fact-intensive. This makes predicting how courts will decide
disparate impact cases quite difficult.

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 added “familial status,” which generally means living ⁴³
with children under 18, to the grounds upon which discrimination in housing is prohibited. One
exception to the 1988 law barring familial status discrimination, however, is that “housing for
older persons” may discriminate against families with children. The committee report that
accompanied the 1988 amendments explains the purpose of this exemption:
^Iⁿ^m^aⁿ^y^p^a^r^t^{s o}^f^t^h^{e co}^uⁿ^tr^y^f^a^m^ilie^s^wⁱ^t^h^c^h^ild^r^eⁿ^ar^{e r}^e^f^u^se^d^h^o^u^sⁱⁿ^g^d^e^sp^ite^th^eir^ab^il^it^y
^t^o^pay^f^o^{r i}^t^.^A^l^t^h^ough^{16 s}^t^at^e^s^h^a^v^e^recogⁿⁱ^{zed t}^hⁱ^s^probl^e^m^an^{d h}^a^v^e^pros^cri^b^{ed t}^hⁱ^s^t^y^pe
^of^dis^c^ri^mⁱⁿ^a^tioⁿ^{to a certain}^ex^tent,^m^a^ny^o^f^th^e^s^{e s}^t^{ate la}^w^s^areⁿ^o^{t eff}^ecti^v^{e.... T}^h^{e bil}^l
^s^p^eci^fⁱ^cal^l^y^e^x^e^m^pt^{s h}^o^u^sⁱⁿ^g^{for ol}^{der pers}^on^s^.^T^h^{e C}^o^m^mⁱ^t^t^{ee recog}ⁿⁱ^ze^s^t^h^at^s^o^m^e^older
^Am^er^icaⁿ^s^h^a^v^e^ch^o^s^eⁿ^to^lⁱ^v^e^to^g^e^th^er^wⁱ^t^h^f^e^llo^w^seⁿⁱ^o^r^citizen^[^s^]ⁱⁿ^r^e^tir^e^m^eⁿ^{t t}^y^p^e
^co^m^m^uⁿ^itie^{s. T}^h^{e Co}^m^mⁱ^t^t^{ee ap}^p^r^{eciates th}^{e in}^ter^e^{st an}^d^ex^p^e^c^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^t^h^e^s^eⁱⁿ^dⁱ^vⁱ^d^u^a^l^s^h^a^v^e⁴⁴
ⁱⁿ^li^vⁱ^ngⁱⁿ^envⁱ^ronm^eⁿ^ts^tai^l^{ored to th}^{eir s}^p^ecifⁱ^{c n}^eeds^.
Housing for older persons” is defined as housing that is (1) provided under any state or federal
housing program for the elderly, (2) “intended for and solely occupied by persons 62 years of age
or older,” or (3) “intended and operated for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older” and

⁴¹^Se^e^,^e.^g^.^{, T}^s^om^ba^nidis^v^.^W^e^s^t^H^a^v^e^{n Fir}^e^D^e^pt.,³⁵^{2 F.}^3d⁵^65,⁵⁷⁵⁽²^nd^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰³⁾^.
⁴²^Se^e^,^e.^g^.^,^T^hom^ps^on^,³⁴^{8 F}^.^S^u^p^p^.^at⁴¹⁷^-¹⁸^;^Ow^en^{s v.}^Natⁱ^oⁿ^wⁱ^d^{e M}^u^t^.^Iⁿ^{s. C}^o^.,²⁰⁰⁵^U.^S.^Di^st^.^L^E^X^I^{S 15}⁷⁰¹^,⁴⁷^-
^{51 (}^N^.D^.T^e^x^{. 20}⁰⁵⁾^;^see,^a^l^so,²⁹²²^She^r^m^a^{n A}^v^e^.^Te^na^nts^’^A^s^s^o^{c. v}^.^Dⁱ^s^t^rⁱ^c^t^of^C^o^l^u^m^b^ia^{, 44}^{4 F.}³^d⁶^73,⁶^79-⁸⁰
^(D^{.C. Cir.}²⁰^06).
⁴³^T^h^e^sta^t^ute⁽⁴²^U.S.C.^§³⁶^02(k⁾^{) a}^{nd t}^h^e^re^g^u^la^tio^{n (}^{24 C.}^F.R.^§¹⁰⁰^.2⁰⁾^bot^{h de}^fⁱ^ne^“^f^a^m^ilia^{l sta}^t^us”^a^s^f^o^llow^s^:
^“^F^a^m^ilia^{l sta}^t^us”^m^e^aⁿ^{s one}^{or m}^o^reⁱⁿ^divⁱ^dua^{ls (w}^ho^ha^v^e^not^a^tta^ine^d^t^h^e^a^g^e^of^{18 y}^e^a^r^{s) be}^ing
^dom^ic^ile^{d w}^ith—
⁽¹⁾^a^pa^r^e^nt^or^a^not^he^rⁱⁿ^divⁱ^d^u^a^l^ha^vⁱ^ng^le^g^a^{l c}^u^s^t^ody^of^s^u^c^h^indi^vⁱ^dua^{l or}ⁱⁿ^divⁱ^d^u^a^l^s^;^or
^{(2) the}^de^sigⁿ^e^e^of^suc^h^pa^re^nt^or^othe^r^pe^rson^ha^vⁱ^ng^suc^h^c^u^st^ody^{, w}^{ith the}^w^r^itteⁿ
^pe^r^m^is^sⁱ^{on of}^s^u^c^h^pa^r^e^nt^or^othe^r^pe^r^s^on^.
^T^h^e^prote^c^tio^{ns a}^f^f^o^rde^d^a^g^aⁱ^nst^disc^rimⁱ^na^{tion o}ⁿ^t^h^e^ba^sis^of^f^a^m^ilia^{l sta}^t^{us sha}^l^l^a^pply^{to a}ⁿ^y
^pe^r^s^{on w}^ho^is^pr^e^g^na^nt^or^is^{in t}^h^e^pr^oc^e^s^s^of^s^e^c^u^rⁱ^ng^le^g^a^{l c}^u^s^t^od^y^o^f^aⁿ^y^indivⁱ^dua^l^w^{ho ha}^sⁿ^o^t
^at^t^aⁱⁿ^ed^t^h^{e age o}^f¹⁸^y^ear^s.
^T^h^e¹⁹⁸^{8 a}^m^e^ndm^eⁿ^{t a}^l^s^o^a^dde^d^the^haⁿ^d^ic^a^ppe^{d t}^o^the^lis^{t of}^pr^ot^e^c^t^e^d^g^r^oups^.^For^m^o^r^e^inf^o^r^m^a^tⁱ^on^on^this^s^ubje^c^t^,
^see^the^“^D^is^c^rⁱ^m^ina^{tion B}^a^s^e^d^on^H^a^ndic^a^p^”^s^e^c^tion^of^this^r^e^p^o^r^t^.
⁴⁴^H^.^R^e^pt.¹⁰^0-⁷^11,¹⁰⁰^th^Cong^.,²^d^Se^s^s^.¹⁹^{, 2}¹⁽¹⁹^88);^re^printe^dⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸^{8 U}^.^S.C^.^C^.^A^.^N^.²¹⁸⁰^,²¹^82.

that meet several other requirements such as having at least 80% of units occupied by a minimum ⁴⁵
of one individual 55 or older.
An individual who believes in good faith that his or her housing facility qualifies for the familial
status exemption will not be held liable for money damages, even if the facility does not in fact ⁴⁶
qualify as housing for older persons.

In addition to prohibiting discrimination on the grounds discussed above, the FHA also prohibits
discrimination in housing on the basis of handicap. The act defines “handicap” as:
^{(1) a phy}^sⁱ^cal^or^m^eⁿ^t^alⁱ^m^pai^r^m^e^nt^w^hⁱ^c^h^su^bs^t^aⁿ^tⁱ^a^l^l^y^lⁱ^mⁱ^t^s^on^{e or}^m^o^{re o}^f^s^u^c^h^pers^on’^s
^m^a^j^o^{r l}ⁱ^f^{e act}ⁱ^vⁱ^tⁱ^e^s^,^{(2) a rec}^o^{rd of}^h^a^vⁱ^ng^su^{ch an i}^m^pai^r^m^e^nt^{, or (3) bei}ⁿ^{g reg}^a^{rded a}^s⁴⁸
^ha^viⁿ^g^s^u^c^h^aⁿⁱ^m^p^aⁱ^r^m^e^nt^.^”
The definition of handicap expressly precludes the current, illegal use of or addiction to a ⁴⁹
controlled substance. However, because this exclusion does not apply to former drug users, the
definition of handicap thus could encompass individuals who have had drug or alcohol problems
that are severe enough to substantially impair a major life activity, but who are not current illegal
users or addicts. As a result, recovering alcoholics and addicts can fall within the definition of ⁵⁰
“handi cap.”
Discrimination on the basis of handicap under the FHA includes not allowing handicapped
individuals to make reasonable changes to a unit that will “afford [them] the full enjoyment of the ⁵¹
premises.” However, a landlord may premise the changes on the handicapped individual’s
promise to return the unit to its original state. A landlord may not increase a required security
deposit to cover these changes, but may require handicapped persons to, in certain circumstances, ⁵²
make payments into an escrow account to cover restoration costs.
Discrimination against a handicapped person also includes “refusal to make reasonable
accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be ⁵³
necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling.” In addition,

⁴⁵^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽²⁾^.^T^h^e^r^e^m^a^ining^r^e^qu^ir^e^m^eⁿ^ts^f^o^r^the^t^h^ir^d^c^a^t^e^g^or^y^of^hous^ing^f^o^r^olde^r^pe^r^s^ons^a^r^e^tha^t^“^t^he
^housⁱⁿ^g^f^a^c^ilit^y^{or c}^o^m^m^unity^publis^h^[^]^a^{nd a}^dhe^re^[]^to^p^o^lic^ie^s^aⁿ^{d pr}^oc^e^dure^s^t^h^a^t^de^m^ons^tra^t^e^the^inte^nt^re^qu^ire^d^[^t^o
^be^a^ho^using^f^o^{r o}^l^de^r^pe^rsons^]^”^a^{nd t}^h^a^t^t^h^e^f^a^c^ilit^y^c^o^m^p^l^y^w^{ith H}^{UD rule}^{s f}^o^{r oc}^c^upa^nc^y^v^e^ri^fⁱ^c^a^tⁱ^on.⁴²^U.S.C^.^§
³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽²⁾⁽^C⁾^a^nd²⁴^C^.^F.R^.^§^§¹^00.³⁰^4-⁰⁷^.
⁴⁶^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽⁵⁾^.
⁴⁷^T^h^e^g^e^ne^ra^ll^y^a^c^c^e^p^te^{d te}^rm^{is now}^“ⁱ^ndivⁱ^dua^{l w}^{ith a}^di^sa^bili^ty^.”^How^e^v^e^r,^sinc^e^the^FHA^{still use}^s^the^te^rm
^“^h^a^ndic^a^ppe^d,”^t^h^a^t^te^r^m^is^r^e^ta^ine^d^he^r^eⁱⁿ^the^dis^c^us^sⁱ^oⁿ^of^the^F^H^A^.
⁴⁸^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰²⁽^h)^.
⁴⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰²⁽^h)^{. T}^h^e^r^e^g^u^la^tⁱ^ons^a^l^s^o^s^t^a^t^e^tha^t^“^aⁿⁱⁿ^divⁱ^dua^l^s^h^a^{ll n}^o^{t be}^c^onsⁱ^d^e^r^e^d^to^ha^v^e^a^ha^ndic^a^p^s^o^le^ly
^b^ecau^{se th}^{at in}^dⁱ^vⁱ^d^u^{al is a tran}^sv^{estite.” 2}⁴^C.^F.R.^§¹⁰⁰^.²⁰¹^.
⁵⁰^S^ee,^e.^g^.^{, O}^x^f^o^r^d^H^ous^e^-^C^v^.^Cⁱ^t^y^o^f^{St. L}^ouis^,⁷⁷^F.3^d²⁴^9,²⁵^{1 (}⁸^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁶⁾^.
⁵¹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^f⁾⁽³⁾⁽^A⁾^.
⁵²^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.²⁰³⁽^a⁾^.^P^a^y^m^eⁿ^t^s^r^e^quir^e^d^to^be^m^a^de^{into e}^s^c^r^ow^m^u^s^t^be^r^e^a^s^ona^ble^aⁿ^d^m^u^s^t^be^f^o^rⁿ^o^m^o^r^e^thaⁿ
^resto^r^atioⁿ^c^o^sts.
⁵³⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^f⁾⁽³^)(B)).^A^s^exa^m^p^l^{es o}^f^re^asoⁿ^a^b^l^{e acco}^mm^o^d^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^requⁱ^r^ed^b^y^t^h^{e act}^,^t^h^{e regu}^l^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^st^at^{e t}^h^at
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

all “covered multifamily dwellings”⁵⁴ built after March 13, 1991 must meet certain design and
construction specifications that ensure they are readily accessible to and usable by handicapped ⁵⁵
persons. The FHA’s protection for handicapped persons does not require “that a dwelling be
made available to an individual whose tenancy would constitute a direct threat to the health or
safety of other individuals or whose tenancy would result in substantial physical damage to the ⁵⁶
property of others.”
It also is unlawful to ask about the handicaps of an applicant for housing (rental or purchase), or
someone with whom they are associated. However, the regulations do allow raising certain
questions that may have some bearing on one’s handicap, as long as they are asked to all
applicants. For example, all applicants could be asked whether they would be able to mow the ⁵⁷
lawn, as required in a rental agreement.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),⁵⁸ which was enacted subsequent to the 1988 FHA
amendments, does not apply to housing, although it does cover “public accommodations,”
including
^anⁱⁿⁿ^,^h^o^tel,^m^o^{tel, or oth}^e^{r place of}^lodgⁱⁿ^g^e^x^{cept f}^o^{r an}^e^s^tablis^hm^eⁿ^{t located}^wⁱ^t^hⁱⁿ^a
^b^uⁱ^l^dⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^a^t^c^o^nt^aⁱ^ns^no^t^m^o^r^e^t^h^aⁿ^fi^ve^r^o^o^m^{s fo}^r^r^e^nt^o^r^hi^r^e^aⁿ^d^t^h^a^tⁱ^s^a^c^t^ua^l^l^{y o}^c^c^u^pⁱ^e^d⁵⁹
^by^t^h^{e propri}^e^t^o^{r of}^s^u^ch^es^t^a^b^lⁱ^s^hm^eⁿ^t^as^t^h^{e res}ⁱ^den^{ce o}^f^such^propri^e^t^o^r.”
The ADA also covers “commercial facilities,” which it defines as “facilities intended for
nonresidential use ... whose operations affect commerce.” The term excludes, however, “facilities
that are covered or expressly exempted from coverage under the Fair Housing Act.” In other
words, the ADA leaves to the FHA the determination as to which statute applies to any particular ⁶⁰
facility.

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^seein^g^e^y^{e d}^o^g^s^m^u^{st b}^e^p^e^rm^itte^d^ev^en^if^{a b}^uⁱ^l^dⁱⁿ^g^o^t^h^e^rw^{ise p}^r^o^h^ib^its^p^e^{ts, an}^d^h^aⁿ^d^icap^p^e^d^p^a^rkⁱⁿ^g^sp^aces^m^u^{st b}^e
^mad^e^avai^l^a^b^l^{e ev}^enⁱ^f^sp^{aces ar}^{e o}^t^h^e^rwⁱ^s^{e assi}^gn^ed^oⁿ^{a f}ⁱ^rst^-^co^me-fⁱ^r^st^-s^erved^b^a^si^s.²⁴^C.^F^.^R.^§¹⁰⁰^.²⁰⁴⁽^b⁾^.
⁵⁴^“^C^ov^e^r^e^d^m^u^ltifa^m^il^y^dwe^lling^s^”^ha^v^e^f^{our or}^m^o^re^liv^ing^uni^{ts. 2}⁴^C.F.R^.^§¹^00.²⁰^1.
⁵⁵⁴²^U^.^S.C.^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^f⁾⁽³^{)(C). I}ⁿ¹⁹⁹¹^,^HUD^p^u^b^lish^e^d^fⁱⁿ^a^{l Fair Ho}^u^sⁱⁿ^g^A^cce^ssib^ility^G^u^id^elin^{es to}^p^r^o^v^id^e^b^uⁱ^l^d^ers
^an^d^d^e^v^e^lo^p^e^{rs w}^ith^techⁿⁱ^{cal g}^uⁱ^d^an^{ce w}^ith^th^{ese accessib}^ility^req^u^irem^en^{ts. 5}⁶^Fed^.^Reg^.⁹^,⁴⁷²^(M^arch⁶^,¹⁹⁹¹⁾^.
^{HUD supple}^m^eⁿ^te^{d the}^s^e^g^u^ide^lⁱⁿ^e^sⁱⁿ¹⁹^94.⁵⁹^Fe^d^.^Re^g^.³³^,3⁶²^(June²⁸^,¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^.
⁵⁶^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^f⁾⁽⁹⁾^.
⁵⁷^{24 C}^.^F.R^.^§¹⁰^0.²⁰²⁽^c⁾^{. Ex}^a^m^ples^tha^t^a^r^e^pr^ov^ide^dⁱⁿ^t^h^e^r^e^g^u^la^ti^ons^a^r^e^:
^{(1) In}^quiry^int^o^aⁿ^a^p^plic^aⁿ^{t’s a}^bⁱ^lity^{to m}^e^e^t^th^e^re^quire^m^e^{nts of}^ow^ne^{rship or te}^na^nc^y^,^{(2) Inq}^u^iry
^{to de}^te^rm^ine^w^h^e^t^he^{r a}ⁿ^a^pplic^aⁿ^t^{is qua}^lif^ie^{d f}^o^{r a}^dw^e^lling^a^v^a^ila^ble^oⁿ^ly^{to pe}^rsons^w^ith
^ha^ndic^a^p^s.^{.. (}⁴^{) In}^qu^iring^w^h^e^t^he^{r a}ⁿ^a^p^p^lic^aⁿ^{t f}^o^{r a}^dw^e^lling^{is a}^c^u^rre^{nt il}^le^g^a^{l a}^buse^r^{or a}^d^dic^t^of
^a^c^ontr^o^lle^{d s}^u^bs^ta^nc^e^...^.
⁵⁸⁴²^U^.^S^.^C^.^§§¹²¹⁰^1,^et^seq^.^For^a^m^o^r^e^de^ta^ile^{d dis}^c^us^sⁱ^oⁿ^of^the^A^D^A^,^se^e,^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^98-⁹²^1,^T^h^{e A}^m^eri^c^aⁿ^s
^with^Disa^b^ilit^{ies Act (}^A^{DA): S}^t^a^t^u^t^o^r^{y L}^aⁿ^g^u^a^g^e^aⁿ^d^Recen^{t Issu}^e^s^{, by}^N^a^ncy^L^e^e^J^one^s^.
⁵⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§¹²¹⁸¹⁽⁷⁾⁽^A⁾^.
⁶⁰^T^h^e^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^’^s^c^o^m^m^e^nts^{on i}^t^s^A^D^A^r^u^le^s^a^ddr^e^s^s^mi^xed^use^f^a^c^ilitie^{s, suc}^h^a^s^hote^l^{s tha}^t^a^l^so^ha^v^e
^sep^a^rat^e^acco^mm^o^d^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^f^o^{r ap}^art^m^en^t^s^.^T^h^{e co}^mmen^t^{s exp}^l^aiⁿ^t^h^at^t^h^{e resi}^d^eⁿ^tⁱ^a^l^wⁱⁿ^g^w^o^u^l^d^b^e^c^o^vered^b^y^t^h^e
^FH^A^ev^eⁿ^tho^u^g^h^the^r^e^s^t^of^the^h^o^te^{l w}^ould^be^c^o^v^e^r^e^{d by}^the^A^D^A^.^H^o^w^e^ve^r^:
^[ⁱ^]^f^{a h}^o^t^e^l^al^l^o^w^s^b^o^t^h^resi^d^e^ntⁱ^a^l^an^d^s^h^o^r^t^-^t^e^rm^st^a^y^s,^b^u^t^do^{es not}^al^l^o^cat^{e sp}^{ace f}^o^{r t}^h^ese
^dif^f^e^r^eⁿ^{t use}^s^{in se}^pa^ra^te^{, d}ⁱ^sc^re^te^uni^{ts, b}^o^t^h^the^A^D^A^a^{nd the}^Fa^ir^Housing^A^c^{t m}^a^y^a^ppl^y^{to the}
^f^a^c^ility^{. Suc}^h^de^te^rm^ina^{tions w}^{ill ne}^e^d^to^be^m^a^de^{on a}^c^a^s^e^-^by^-c^a^s^e^ba^{sis.... A}^sim^ila^{r a}ⁿ^a^l^y^s^is
^w^{ould a}^l^so^be^a^ppl^ie^{d t}^o^o^t^he^{r re}^sⁱ^de^ntia^{l f}^a^c^ilitie^{s tha}^t^prov^ide^s^o^cⁱ^a^l^se^rv^ic^e^s^{, inc}^l^uding^h^o^m^e^le^ss
^she^lte^{rs, she}^lte^{rs f}^o^{r pe}^op^le^se^e^k^ing^re^f^u^g^e^f^r^o^m^d^o^m^estⁱ^c^vi^o^l^en^ce,ⁿ^u^rsiⁿ^{g ho}^m^e^s,^resi^d^eⁿ^tⁱ^a^l^care
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

Several other federal laws also protect individuals with disabilities from housing discrimination.
Under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, discrimination against individuals with ⁶¹
disabilities is prohibited in any federally funded or federally conducted program or activity, and
under the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, certain publicly owned residential buildings and ⁶²
facilities must be accessible to individuals with physical disabilities.
The FHA’s prohibition against discrimination on the basis of handicap extends to protect group
homes for the disabled from discrimination by certain types of state or local zoning laws. While
the FHA does not “limit[] the applicability of any reasonable local, State, or Federal restrictions ⁶³
regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling,” it does prohibit
“[l]ocal zoning and land use laws that treat groups of unrelated persons with disabilities less ⁶⁴
favorably than similar groups of unrelated persons without disabilities....” Nevertheless, some
municipalities have attempted to restrict the location of group homes for disabled individuals by ⁶⁵
enacting zoning ordinances that establish occupancy limits for group homes. Typically
established to maintain the residential character of certain neighborhoods, such occupancy limits
frequently operate to restrict group homes for recovering drug users or other disabled individuals.
It is also possible that a city’s denial of a variance from such an occupancy ordinance could be in ⁶⁶
violation of the FHA if the denial is not reasonable. As a result, these limits continue to be the ⁶⁷
subject of controversy and legal challenges under the FHA.
Indeed, in 1995, the Supreme Court considered the issue of zoning restrictions on group homes ⁶⁸
for the handicapped. In City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., a group home for 10 to 12 adults
recovering from alcoholism and drug addiction was cited for violating a city ordinance because it
was located in a neighborhood zoned for single-family residences. The ordinance that Oxford
House, Inc. was charged with violating defined “family” as “persons [without regard to number] ⁶⁹
related by genetics, adoption, or marriage, or a group of five or fewer [unrelated] persons.”

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^f^a^c^ilitie^{s, a}^nd^othe^{r f}^a^c^ilitie^{s w}^h^e^r^e^pe^{rsons m}^a^y^re^side^f^o^{r v}^a^r^y^ing^l^e^ng^{ths of}^tim^e^.^”^{56 Fe}^{d. Re}^g^.
^35,⁵⁵^{2 (}^J^uly^26,¹⁹⁹¹⁾^.
⁶¹^{29 U}^.^S.C^.^§⁷⁹⁴⁽^a⁾^.
⁶²⁴²^U^.^S^.^C^.^§§⁴¹⁵¹^-⁵⁷^.
⁶³^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽¹⁾^.
⁶⁴^J^o^int^Sta^t^e^m^eⁿ^{t of}^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^aⁿ^d^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^nt^of^H^ous^ing^aⁿ^{d U}^r^baⁿ^D^e^v^e^lopm^eⁿ^{t, G}^r^oup
^H^o^m^e^s^,^L^o^c^a^l^La^{nd U}^s^e^,^a^nd^the^Fa^{ir H}^ousⁱⁿ^g^A^c^{t, http://w}^w^w^.us^doj.g^ov^/^c^rt/housⁱⁿ^g^/^fⁱ^na^l8_1^.htm^.
⁶⁵^Dⁱ^s^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^{tion a}^g^aⁱ^ns^{t g}^r^oup^h^o^m^e^s^f^o^r^the^dis^a^ble^d^is^pr^o^hⁱ^b^ite^d^not^on^ly^b^y^the^FH^A^,^but^by^the^C^ons^tit^uti^on,^to
^the^e^x^te^{nt tha}^t^s^u^c^h^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^{tion is}^f^oun^{d t}^o^be^ir^r^a^tio^na^{l. I}ⁿ^C^ity^of^C^l^e^bur^ne^v^.^C^l^e^bur^ne^Lⁱ^vⁱ^ng^C^e^nte^r^{, 4}^{73 U}^.^S.
⁴³²⁽¹⁹⁸⁵⁾^{, t}^h^e^S^upr^e^m^e^C^our^{t h}^e^{ld u}ⁿ^c^ons^ti^tu^tiona^l^a^z^oni^ng^or^di^na^nc^e^tha^t^a^l^l^o^w^e^{d g}^r^oup^hom^e^s^g^e^ne^r^a^ll^y^,^but
^pr^o^h^ibite^{d t}^h^e^m^f^o^r^m^e^nta^lly^r^e^t^a^r^d^e^dⁱ^ndivⁱ^d^u^a^l^s^.^T^h^e^ba^sⁱ^s^f^o^r^the^de^cⁱ^sⁱ^{on w}^a^s^tha^t^the^or^di^na^nc^e^w^a^s^ba^s^e^{d on}
^ir^r^a^tiona^l^pr^e^j^u^d^ic^e^;^i.e^.^,^the^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^{tion f}^a^ile^{d a}^“^r^a^tiona^{l ba}^sⁱ^s^”^te^s^t^un^de^r^the^E^qua^l^Pr^ote^c^tⁱ^{on C}^l^a^u^s^e^of^the
^Four^te^eⁿ^{th A}^m^e^ndm^eⁿ^t.
⁶⁶^A^cⁱ^t^y^c^{ould be}^s^u^bje^c^t^t^o^a^dis^p^a^r^a^t^e^im^pa^c^t^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^{tion c}^l^aⁱ^m^ba^s^e^{d on}^a^{ll of}^theⁱ^r^de^nia^l^s^f^o^r^v^a^rⁱ^aⁿ^c^e^s^{. (}^F^or
^m^o^{re i}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^atⁱ^oⁿ^oⁿ^dⁱ^sp^arat^{e i}^m^p^act^an^al^y^sⁱ^s^,^se^e^t^h^{e “Di}^s^p^a^rat^e^Im^p^act^Di^s^c^ri^mⁱⁿ^a^tion”^se^c^tio^{n of}^{this re}^p^o^rt.)
⁶⁷^Mⁱ^ch^ael^J.^Davi^s,^Pr^ote^c^tin^{g G}^r^o^{up H}^o^m^e^s^for^t^h^e^N^on-^H^aⁿ^d^ic^a^p^p^e^d:^Zoⁿⁱⁿ^gⁱⁿ^t^h^e^Pos^t^-^E^dm^o^nds^Er^a^,⁴⁶^Kan.^L.
^R^e^v^.^{777 (}¹⁹⁹⁸⁾^.
⁶⁸⁵¹^{4 U}^.^S^.⁷²⁵⁽¹⁹⁹⁵⁾^.
⁶⁹^Id^{. a}^t⁷²^8.

The group home acknowledged that it was in violation of the ordinance, but claimed that it was
entitled to be in the neighborhood anyway because the FHA required the city to “make reasonable
accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be ⁷⁰
necessary to afford [handicapped] person[s] equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” The
city responded that it was not required to accommodate the group home because the FHA
exempts from its coverage “any reasonable local, State, or Federal restrictions regarding the ⁷¹
maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling.”
The Supreme Court held that this exemption did not permit the city’s zoning ordinance because
the ordinance’s definition of family was not a restriction regarding “‘the maximum number of ⁷²
occupants’ a dwelling may house.” According to the Court, the FHA:
^doesⁿ^o^t^ex^e^m^pt^pres^cri^p^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^of^t^h^{e f}^a^mⁱ^l^y^-^d^e^fⁱⁿⁱⁿ^g^kⁱⁿ^d^{, i}^.^{e., pr}^ovⁱ^sⁱ^ons^desⁱ^gn^{ed t}^o^f^o^s^t^e^r
^t^h^{e f}^a^mⁱ^l^y^ch^aract^{er of}^{a n}^eⁱ^g^hborh^ood.^In^s^t^{ead, §}³⁶⁰^7(b)⁽¹⁾^’^s^abs^o^l^u^t^e^e^x^em^p^tⁱ^oⁿ^r^e^m^o^v^e^s
^f^r^o^m^t^h^{e FH}^A’s^s^c^{ope on}^l^y^t^o^{tal occu}^pan^c^y^li^mⁱ^ts^{, i.e., num}^{erical ceili}^ng^s^t^h^{at s}^e^r^v^{e to}⁷³
^prev^en^t^ov^ercro^w^di^ngⁱⁿ^lⁱ^vⁱ^ng^qu^art^e^rs^.
Because the ordinance set a numerical ceiling for unrelated occupants but not related occupants, it
was clearly designed to preserve the family character of neighborhoods, not to place overall
occupancy limits on residences. As a result, the Court held that the ordinance was not exempt ⁷⁴
from the FHA’s prohibition against disability discrimination. (The Court did not decide whether ⁷⁵
or not this ordinance actually violated the FHA.)
In cases in which the ordinance in question is “designed to foster the family character of a
neighborhood” or facially discriminates against a FHA protected class by differentiating on its
face between protected groups and non-protected groups, the burden is on the defendant to show
that it is not unlawful discrimination under the FHA. However, the U.S. Courts of Appeals are
split as to which of two discriminatory treatment tests defendants must meet in this situation.
Before addressing the details of these two tests, it is important to note that determining if zoning
ordinances violate the FHA requires a case-by-case assessment, based on the ordinance language
and the specific facts surrounding the alleged violation and/or the city’s denial of a variance from ⁷⁶
the ordinance. This makes predicting how a court will rule on a particular ordinance difficult,
especially in light of the fact that the lower courts do not apply a single, uniform test. However,
an analysis of existing case law can provide some guidance on the matter.
A minority of courts, including the Eighth Circuit, apply a rational basis test, which merely
requires the defendant town or city to show there is a legitimate, nondiscriminatory purpose for ⁷⁷
classification (or denial from a variance) on the basis of a FHA protected class. This is a

⁷⁰^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁴⁽^f⁾⁽³⁾⁽^B⁾^;^see,^Ed^m^o^nd^s^,⁵¹^{4 U}^.^S.^a^t^.⁷²^9-³⁰^.
⁷¹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽¹⁾^;^see,^Ed^m^onds^,⁵^{14 U}^.^{S. a}^t^.⁷^36.
⁷²^Edm^o^nds^,⁵^{14 U}^.^{S. a}^t⁷²^{8 (}^qu^otiⁿ^g^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶⁰⁷⁽^b)⁽¹⁾⁾^.
⁷³^Id^.
⁷⁴^Id^.^a^t⁷³^6-³⁷^{. O}^f^c^our^s^e^{, t}^h^e^FH^A^doe^s^not^pr^e^v^eⁿ^{t z}^oni^ng^or^dina^nc^e^s^tha^t^r^e^s^t^rⁱ^c^t^g^r^ou^p^hom^e^s^oc^cupie^d^by
^indivⁱ^d^u^a^l^s^w^{ho a}^r^eⁿ^o^t^of^a^pr^ote^c^te^{d c}^l^a^s^s^,^s^u^c^h^a^s^f^r^a^t^e^r^nity^s^t^udents^.
⁷⁵^Id^.^a^t⁷³^8.
⁷⁶^Se^e^{, J}^oⁱⁿ^{t Sta}^t^e^m^eⁿ^{t of}^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^a^{nd the}^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^H^ousⁱⁿ^g^a^{nd U}^r^ba^{n D}^e^v^e^lo^pm^eⁿ^{t, G}^r^oup
^H^o^m^e^s^,^L^o^c^a^l^La^{nd U}^s^e^,^a^nd^the^Fa^{ir H}^ousⁱⁿ^g^A^c^{t, http://w}^w^w^.us^doj.g^ov^/^c^rt/housⁱⁿ^g^/^fⁱ^na^l8_1^.htm^.
⁷⁷^O^x^f^o^r^d^H^ous^e^-^C^v^.^C^ity^of^{St. Louis}^,⁷⁷^F.^3d²⁴^9,²⁵^1-⁵²⁽⁸^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁶⁾^.

relatively low burden to meet. The majority rule, which is followed by the Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth ⁷⁸
Circuits, on the other hand, requires the defendant to meet a more exacting test.
In Oxford House-C v. City of St. Louis, the Eighth Circuit addressed a city ordinance that limited
“single family dwellings” to three unrelated individuals, or in the case of a group home, to eight
unrelated individuals. The court stated, “[r]ather than discriminating against Oxford House ⁷⁹
residents, the City’s zoning code favors them on its face.” Because the ordinance was not
deemed to be discriminatory, the Eighth Circuit held that the city need only provide a rational
basis for enacting the ordinance, a requirement which was satisfied by the city’s demonstration of ⁸⁰
an interest in preserving residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, the Eighth Circuit held that the
city “did not fail to accommodate the Oxford House as the act requires” because the group home
refused to apply for a variance for higher occupancy limits and therefore never gave the city the ⁸¹
opportunity to grant such accommodation.
In contrast, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Larkin v. Department of Social Services,
addressed a state licensing requirement that group homes for the handicapped may not be spaced
within a 1,500 foot radius of other such group homes and must notify the communities in which ⁸²
the group homes are to be located. The court ruled that these spacing and notification
requirements discriminated on their face, holding that “statutes that single out for regulation ⁸³
group homes for the handicapped are facially discriminatory.” Once the court ruled that these
non-uniform conditions were facially discriminatory, the test shifted from a rational basis test, to
a more demanding test that required the defendant to “demonstrate that they are warranted by the
unique and specific needs and abilities of those handicapped persons to whom the regulations ⁸⁴
apply.” The Sixth Circuit held that the state had failed to meet this burden. In general, “[t]he
Department of Justice and HUD take the position, and most courts that have addressed the issue ⁸⁵
agree, that density restrictions are generally inconsistent with the Fair Housing Act.”
With regard to claims that localities failed to make “reasonable accommodations” for group
homes, the Joint Statement by HUD and the Department of Justice states:
^W^h^eth^e^r^a^particu^l^ar^acco^m^m^o^d^ation^is^reas^on^a^b^l^e^d^e^p^eⁿ^d^s^oⁿ^t^h^e^f^a^ct^s^,^aⁿ^d^m^u^s^t^b^e^d^e^cⁱ^d^e^d
^on^{a cas}^e^-^b^y^-^cas^{e bas}ⁱ^s^.^T^h^{e deter}^mⁱⁿ^ation^o^f^w^h^{at i}^s^reas^{onable depen}^d^s^on^th^{e a}ⁿ^s^w^ers^to
^t^w^{o qu}^estⁱ^oⁿ^s^:^Fⁱ^rs^t^,^does^t^h^e^requ^es^tⁱ^m^pos^{e an}^un^du^{e burden}^{or ex}^pen^s^{e on}^t^h^{e l}^o^cal
^g^o^v^e^rnm^eⁿ^t^?^S^econ^d^{, does}^t^h^e^propos^{ed u}^s^{e creat}^{e a}^f^uⁿ^d^a^m^en^t^a^l^al^t^e^ratⁱ^oⁿⁱⁿ^t^h^{e zo}ⁿⁱⁿ^g
^s^c^h^e^m^e^?^If^th^{e an}^s^w^{er to eith}^{er qu}^es^tioⁿ^is^“y^e^s^{,” th}^{e r}^e^qu^es^{ted acco}^m^m^odatioⁿ^is⁸⁶
^unr^e^a^so^na^b^l^e^.

⁷⁸^C^o^m^t^y^.^H^ous^e^v^.^C^ity^of^B^o^is^e^,⁴⁹⁰^F.3^d¹⁰^41,¹⁰⁵⁰⁽⁹^th^Cⁱ^r^.²⁰⁰⁷⁾^;^Lar^kⁱⁿ^{, 8}⁹^F^.³^d^a^t²⁹^{0; Ba}^ng^e^r^te^{r v}^.^O^r^e^m^Cit^y
^C^o^r^p^.^,⁴⁶^F.^3d¹⁴⁹¹^,¹⁵⁰¹^-⁰⁴⁽¹⁰^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁵⁾^.
⁷⁹^Oxfo^rd^Hou^s^e^,⁷⁷^F.^3d^at²⁵^1.
⁸⁰^Id^{. a}^t²⁵^2.
⁸¹^Id^{. a}^t²⁵^3.
⁸²^{89 F.}^{3d 28}⁵⁽⁶^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁶⁾^.
⁸³^Id^{. a}^t²⁹^0.
⁸⁴ Id. See also, Marbrunak, Inc. v. City of Stow, 974 F.2d 45, 47 (6^th Cir. 1992).
⁸⁵^J^o^int^Sta^t^e^m^eⁿ^{t of}^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^aⁿ^d^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^nt^of^H^ous^ing^aⁿ^{d U}^r^baⁿ^D^e^v^e^lopm^eⁿ^{t, G}^r^oup
^H^o^m^e^s^,^L^o^c^a^l^La^{nd U}^s^e^,^a^nd^the^Fa^{ir H}^ousⁱⁿ^g^A^c^{t, http://w}^w^w^.us^doj.g^ov^/^c^rt/housⁱⁿ^g^/^fⁱ^na^l8_1^.htm^.
⁸⁶^Id^.

One example of a necessary reasonable accommodation might be allowing a deaf tenant to have a ⁸⁷
hearing dog in an apartment complex that normally prohibits pets. Another example might be
the provision of a variance from an ordinance that bars five or more unrelated people from living
in a single family home, for a group home of five handicapped individuals, where it is shown that
such a home would “have no more impact on parking, traffic, noise, utility use, and other typcial
concerns of zoning than an ‘ordinary family.’” Denial of a variance from this ordinance likely ⁸⁸
would not be unreasonable for a group home of 35 handicapped individuals.

Under the FHA, the Secretary of HUD, the Attorney General, and victims of discrimination may
all take action to enforce the prohibition against discrimination. Typically, HUD has primary
enforcement through agency adjudication, but the Department of Justice and aggrieved
individuals may also bring actions in federal court under certain circumstances.
Within one year after an alleged discriminatory housing practice has occurred or terminated, an
aggrieved person may file a complaint with the Secretary, or the Secretary may file a complaint
on his own initiative. When a complaint is filed, the Secretary must, within 10 days, serve the
respondent—the party charged with committing a discriminatory practice—with notice of the ⁸⁹
complaint. The respondent must then answer the complaint within 10 days.
From the filing of the complaint, the Secretary has 100 days, subject to extension, to complete an ⁹⁰
investigation of the alleged discriminatory housing practice. During this time, the Secretary ⁹¹
must, “to the extent feasible, engage in conciliation with respect to” the complaint. Agreements
arising out of such conciliation are subject to the Secretary’s approval. Such agreements may
provide for binding arbitration, which may award appropriate relief, including monetary relief, to ⁹²
the aggrieved party. The Secretary may also authorize a civil action for temporary or ⁹³
preliminary relief, pending final disposition of the complaint.

⁸⁷^Se^e^,^B^r^on^{k v.}^Iⁿ^ei^ch^en^{, 54}^F^.³^d⁴²⁵⁽⁷^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁵⁾^.
⁸⁸^Se^e^{, J}^oⁱⁿ^{t Sta}^t^e^m^eⁿ^{t of}^the^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^a^{nd the}^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^H^ousⁱⁿ^g^a^{nd U}^r^ba^{n D}^e^v^e^lo^pm^eⁿ^{t, G}^r^oup
^H^o^m^e^s^,^L^o^c^a^l^La^{nd U}^s^e^,^a^nd^the^Fa^{ir H}^ousⁱⁿ^g^A^c^{t, http://w}^w^w^.us^doj.g^ov^/^c^rt/housⁱⁿ^g^/^fⁱ^na^l8_1^.htm^.
⁸⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^a⁾⁽¹⁾^.
⁹⁰⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^a)(¹^)(B)(i^v).^If^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ary^dⁱ^sco^v^{ers t}^h^at^t^h^{e co}^m^p^l^aⁱⁿ^tⁱ^s^wⁱ^t^hⁱⁿ^t^h^{e j}^u^ri^sdⁱ^c^tⁱ^oⁿ^o^f^ei^t^h^{er a st}^at^e
^o^r^l^o^cal^p^u^b^lⁱ^c^agen^cy^t^h^at^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ar^y^h^a^{s cert}ⁱ^fⁱ^ed^,^h^e^m^u^st^refe^{r t}^h^{e co}^m^p^l^aⁱⁿ^t^t^o^t^h^at^agen^c^y^b^e^fo^{re t}^a^kiⁿ^g^an^y
^actⁱ^oⁿ^.^If^t^h^{e agen}^cy^f^aⁱ^l^s^t^o^co^mmen^{ce t}^h^{e p}^r^o^ceedⁱⁿ^{gs w}ⁱ^t^hⁱⁿ³⁰^d^a^y^s^a^f^t^e^{r re}^f^e^rral^,^o^r^h^a^viⁿ^g^co^mmen^ced^t^h^em^,^fai^l^s
^t^o^carry^t^h^e^m^f^o^rward^wⁱ^t^h^reasoⁿ^a^b^l^{e p}^r^o^m^p^tⁿ^e^ss,^o^rⁱ^f^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ary^d^e^t^e^r^mⁱⁿ^{es t}^h^at^t^h^{e agen}^c^yⁿ^o^l^oⁿ^g^{er q}^u^a^lⁱ^fⁱ^e^{s f}^o^r
^certⁱ^fⁱ^c^atⁱ^oⁿ^,^t^h^en^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ary^ma^y^t^a^ke^f^u^rt^h^e^{r act}ⁱ^oⁿ^.⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹⁰^(f^).^T^h^{e ru}^l^e^{s regard}ⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^e^certⁱ^fⁱ^catⁱ^oⁿ^an^d
^f^unding^of^s^t^a^t^e^a^nd^loc^a^l^h^ousⁱⁿ^g^eⁿ^f^o^r^c^em^eⁿ^{t a}^g^eⁿ^cⁱ^es^is^pr^ov^ide^dⁱⁿ²⁴^C^.^F^.^R^.^{§ 1}¹⁰^aⁿ^d^w^a^s^am^ende^d^by^a^fⁱ^na^l
^r^u^l^e^at⁷²^F^e^d.^R^e^g.¹⁹^,⁰⁷⁰⁽^A^p^rⁱ^l¹⁶^,²⁰⁰⁷⁾^.
⁹¹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^b)⁽¹⁾^.
⁹²⁴²^U^.^S.C.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^b⁾^{. If}^th^e^Secretar^y^h^a^{s reaso}ⁿ^a^b^l^{e cau}^{se to}^b^e^liev^e^th^{at th}^{e resp}^oⁿ^d^eⁿ^t^h^a^s^b^r^each^ed^{a co}ⁿ^c^iliati^oⁿ
^agree^m^en^t^,^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ary^m^u^st^re^{fer t}^h^{e m}^a^t^t^e^{r t}^o^t^h^{e A}^t^t^o^rn^ey^G^eⁿ^e^ral^wⁱ^t^h^{a reco}^mm^en^d^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^t^h^at^{a ci}^vi^l^actⁱ^oⁿ^b^e
^fⁱ^l^e^d^t^o^en^f^o^{rce t}^h^{e agree}^m^en^t^.⁴²^U.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^c).
⁹³⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^e)(¹^).^Upoⁿ^recei^p^t^o^f^su^ch^au^t^h^o^rⁱ^zatⁱ^o^n,^t^h^{e A}^t^t^o^rn^ey^G^eⁿ^e^ral^m^u^st^“p^ro^m^p^t^l^y^c^o^mm^en^c^e^an^d
^m^a^inta^{in suc}^h^aⁿ^a^c^tio^n.”

At the completion of the investigation, the Secretary must determine whether reasonable cause
exists to believe that a discriminatory housing practice has occurred or is about to occur. If he
finds no reasonable cause, then he must dismiss the complaint. If he finds reasonable cause, then
he must issue a charge on behalf of the aggrieved person in the absence of a conciliation ⁹⁴
agreement. If a charge is issued, then the Secretary or any party to the dispute may elect to have
the case heard in a federal district court. Otherwise, the case shall be heard by an administrative ⁹⁵
law judge (ALJ). In such a hearing, parties may appear with legal representation, have ⁹⁶
subpoenas issued, cross examine witnesses, and submit evidence.
The ALJ must commence a hearing within 120 days of a charge being issued, unless adhering to
that timeframe is impracticable. He also must “make findings of fact and conclusions of law
within 60 days after the end of the hearing ... unless it is impracticable to do so.”
If the administrative law judge finds that a respondent has engaged or is about to engage in a
discriminatory housing practice, such administrative law judge shall promptly issue an order for
such relief as may be appropriate, which may include actual damages ... and injunctive or
equitable relief.
The ALJ may also impose a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for a first offense or more if it is not a ⁹⁷
first offense.
The ALJ’s findings, conclusions, and orders may be reviewed by the Secretary.⁹⁸ Parties may ⁹⁹
appeal such orders to the federal courts. The Secretary may seek enforcement of an ¹⁰⁰
administrative order in a federal court of appeals. Such court may “affirm, modify, or set aside,
in whole or in part, the order, or remand” it to the ALJ for additional proceedings. The court also
may grant any party “such temporary relief, restraining order, or other order as the court deems ¹⁰¹
just and proper.”
In any administrative proceeding, or any civil action brought in lieu of an administrative
proceeding, “the administrative law judge or the court, as the case may be, may allow the ¹⁰²
prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee and costs.”

⁹⁴^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁰⁽^g⁾⁽²⁾^.
⁹⁵⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹²⁽^a).^Up^on^su^c^h^an^el^ectⁱ^oⁿ^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ary^m^u^st^au^t^h^o^rⁱ^{ze a ci}^vi^l^actⁱ^o^n,^w^hⁱ^c^h^t^h^{e A}^t^t^o^rn^ey^G^eⁿ^e^ral
⁽^w^{ithin 3}⁰^da^y^s⁾^m^u^s^t^c^o^m^m^e^nc^e^a^{nd m}^a^inta^{in o}ⁿ^be^ha^lf^of^the^a^g^gr^ie^v^e^{d pe}^r^s^{on, w}^{ho m}^a^y^inte^r^v^eⁿ^e^a^s^of^rⁱ^g^h^{t in t}^h^a^t
^civ^{il actio}ⁿ^.^If^th^{e f}^e^d^e^{ral co}^u^r^{t f}ⁱⁿ^d^s^a^dⁱ^scrimⁱⁿ^a^to^ry^p^r^actic^{e to}^o^k^p^l^{ace, it m}^a^y^a^w^ard^actu^a^{l an}^d^p^uⁿ^itiv^{e d}^a^m^a^g^e^{s to}
^t^h^{e ext}^eⁿ^tⁱ^t^w^o^u^l^dⁱⁿ^{a ci}^vi^l^actⁱ^oⁿ^co^mm^en^ced^b^y^{a p}^rⁱ^v^at^{e p}^e^rsoⁿ^.⁴²^U.^S^.^C^.^{§ 36}¹²^(o^).
⁹⁶^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^c⁾^.
⁹⁷^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^g⁾^.
⁹⁸^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^h)^.
⁹⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽ⁱ⁾^.
¹⁰⁰^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^j⁾^.
¹⁰¹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^k⁾^.
¹⁰²^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹²⁽^p)^.^S^{ee a}^l^so^{, B}^u^c^k^ha^nno^{n B}^d^{. &}^C^a^r^e^H^o^m^e^{, I}ⁿ^c^.^v^.^W^.^Va^{. D}^e^p’^t^of^H^e^a^{lth a}^nd^H^u^m^aⁿ
^Re^sourc^e^s^{, 53}^{2 U.S}^.⁵⁹⁸^,⁶⁰⁵⁽²⁰^{01) (}^d^eⁿ^yⁱ^ng^a^ttorne^y^s’^f^e^e^s^{to pl}^aⁱ^ntif^f^s^w^{ho trie}^{d to}^c^l^aⁱ^m^“^p^re^va^iling^pa^rty^”^sta^t^us
^w^h^e^r^e^the^r^e^w^a^{s no “}^a^lte^ra^{tion i}ⁿ^the^le^g^a^{l re}^la^tionshi^p^of^the^pa^rtie^s.”⁾^{. In a}^d^diti^on,^the^Uⁿ^ite^d^Sta^t^e^s^{is lia}^ble^f^o^{r suc}^h
^f^e^{es an}^d^co^st^{s t}^o^t^h^{e ext}^eⁿ^t^p^r^o^vⁱ^d^ed^b^y^t^h^{e E}^q^u^a^l^A^cce^{ss t}^o^Ju^stⁱ^{ce A}^c^t^(E^A^J^A⁾^,^w^hⁱ^c^h^make^{s t}^h^{e Uni}^t^e^d^S^t^at^{es l}ⁱ^a^bl^e
^f^o^{r the}^pre^v^a^iling^pa^rty^’^{s a}^ttorne^y^{s’ f}^e^e^s^if^the^Unite^{d Sta}^t^e^s^f^a^{ils to}^prov^e^tha^t^{its p}^o^siti^{on “}^w^a^s^subs^ta^ntia^lly^justif^ie^d
^or^tha^t^s^p^e^cⁱ^a^l^cⁱ^r^c^um^s^t^aⁿ^c^e^s^m^a^ke^aⁿ^a^w^a^r^{d unjus}^t.”^{5 U}^.^S^.^C^.^{§ 5}⁰⁴⁽^a⁾⁽¹⁾^,²⁸^U^.^S.C^.^§²⁴¹²⁽^d)⁽¹⁾⁽^A⁾^.^For^m^o^r^e
^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion on}^this^s^ubje^c^t^,^see^,^C^R^S^R^e^por^t⁹⁴^-⁹^70,^Aw^ar^ds^of^A^ttorⁿ^e^y^s^’^Fe^e^s^by^Fe^de^r^a^l^C^o^ur^ts^and^Fe^de^r^a^l
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

The Attorney General (AG) may bring a civil action in federal district court if (1) the AG has
reasonable cause to think that an individual or a group is “engaged in a pattern or practice” of
denying one’s rights under the FHA and “such denial raises an issue of general public
importance”; or (2) the Secretary refers to him a case involving a violation of a conciliation ¹⁰³
agreement or of housing discrimination. In such a civil action, the court may issue preventive
relief, such as an injunction or a restraining order, provide monetary damages, issue civil
penalties, or provide some other appropriate relief. In some instances, prevailing parties may be ¹⁰⁴
able to recover reasonable legal costs and fees.
An “aggrieved person”¹⁰⁵ may commence a civil action, in a federal district court or in a state
court, within two years of “the occurrence or the termination of an alleged discriminatory housing ¹⁰⁶
practice, or the breach of a conciliation agreement....” If the Secretary has filed a complaint, an
aggrieved person may still bring a private suit, unless a conciliation agreement has been reached ¹⁰⁷
or an administrative hearing has begun. The AG may intervene in a private suit if he determines
that the suit is of “general public importance.” If the court determines that discrimination has
occurred or is going to occur, it may award punitive damages, actual damages, equitable relief ¹⁰⁸
(e.g., restraining order, injunction), a temporary restraining order, or other appropriate relief. In ¹⁰⁹
some instances, prevailing parties may be able to recover reasonable legal costs and fees.

^Davⁱ^d^{H. C}^a^rp^en^ter
^L^e^gⁱ^s^l^at^iv^{e A}^t^torn^e^y
^dcarpen^t^er@^c^rs^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁹¹¹⁸

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^A^g^en^ci^es^{, by}^H^e^nr^y^C^ohe^n.
¹⁰³^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁴⁽^a⁾^-⁽^b)^{. “}^U^p^on^tⁱ^m^e^l^y^a^pplic^a^tion,^aⁿ^y^pe^r^s^{on m}^a^y^inte^r^v^eⁿ^e^{in a}^cⁱ^v^{il a}^c^{tion c}^o^m^m^eⁿ^c^e^d^by^the
^A^ttorⁿ^ey^G^e^ne^r^a^l.”^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁴⁽^e⁾^.
¹⁰⁴^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹⁴⁽^e⁾^.
¹⁰⁵^“^A^{n ‘}^a^gg^rⁱ^e^v^e^d^pe^r^s^on’^inc^l^u^d^e^s^aⁿ^y^pe^r^s^{on w}^{ho c}^l^aⁱ^m^s^{to ha}^v^e^be^eⁿ^inj^u^r^e^d^by^a^dis^c^rⁱ^mⁱ^na^tor^y^hous^ing^pr^a^c^tic^e
^{or be}^lie^v^e^s^tha^t^s^u^c^h^pe^rs^oⁿ^w^ill^be^inj^u^re^d^by^a^dis^c^ri^mⁱ^na^tory^hous^ing^pra^c^tic^e^tha^t^is^a^b^o^u^{t t}^o^oc^c^u^r.”⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§
³⁶⁰²⁽ⁱ⁾^.
¹⁰⁶⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§³⁶¹³⁽^a)(¹^).^T^h^{e cal}^cu^l^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^o^f^t^h^{e t}^w^o^y^{ear p}^e^ri^o^d^do^e^sⁿ^o^tⁱⁿ^cl^ud^{e t}^h^{e t}ⁱ^m^{e t}^h^at^an^ad^mⁱⁿⁱ^st^ratⁱ^v^e
^p^r^o^ceedⁱⁿ^{g i}^s^p^eⁿ^dⁱⁿ^g.
¹⁰⁷⁴²^U^.^S.C.^§^§³⁶¹³^(a)(2^)—³⁶¹³⁽^a)(3^).
¹⁰⁸^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹³⁽^c⁾^.
¹⁰⁹^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁶¹³⁽^c⁾⁽²⁾^.