By\u00a0Charlene Crowell<\/p>\n
For nearly 60 years,\u00a0April\u00a0has\u00a0observed\u00a0Fair Housing Month. But this year,\u00a0attorneys general (AGs) from 15 states and the District of Columbia recently filed a joint\u00a0lawsuit<\/a>\u00a0seeking to ensure state and federal agencies will continue to fully enforce the landmark federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), first enacted in 1968 to protect people from unlawful housing discrimination and to punish bad actors.<\/p>\n Filed on March 16 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the lawsuit alleges violations of the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act. It also challenges a Trump administration executive order that directs HUD to end consideration of a crucial mechanism for combating housing discrimination: disparate impact.<\/p>\n \u00a0\u201cHUD, without legal authority, is effectively undermining state laws that offer stronger protections than federal law,\u201d\u00a0said California Attorney General\u00a0Rob Bonta<\/a>, who co-leads the effort. \u201cMy fellow attorneys general and I are united in our answer: not on our watch. HUD\u2019s guidance is unlawful and would only roll back the progress we\u2019ve made to keep our families safe from discrimination that limits where they can live.\u201d<\/p>\n Illinois Attorney General\u00a0Kwame Raoul<\/a>, the lawsuit\u2019s other co-lead, offered similar comments.<\/p>\n \u201cThese actions are part of a broader, ongoing effort by the Trump administration to subvert the legal protections our country has put in place to combat discrimination and to tear down the hard-fought progress we have made for civil rights,\u201d Raoul said. \u201cI will continue to fight for fair access to housing for all Americans and for the rule of law.\u201d<\/p>\n In response to the lawsuit, HUD Secretary\u00a0Scott Turner<\/a>\u00a0said, \u201cLeftist state attorneys general have run to a San Francisco courthouse in a desperate attempt to obstruct President Trump\u2019s America First agenda through political lawfare. Their latest stunt will not succeed.\u201d<\/p>\n But for the thousands of people taking time and effort to file fair housing complaints, the law \u2013 not Trump\u2019s agenda \u2013 remains the valid concern.<\/p>\n According to the\u00a0National Fair Housing Alliance<\/a>, 32,321 fair housing complaints were received in 2024, the most recent data available. Of these complaints, only 0.14 percent were processed by the Department of Justice and 4.85 percent were processed by HUD. The bulk of these complaints \u2013 74.12 percent \u2013 were processed by only 82 private, non-profit fair housing organizations.\u00a0Although this year\u2019s approved HUD budget is\u00a0$77.3 billion, only $86 million is allotted for fair housing, according to the\u00a0Bipartisan Policy Center<\/a>.<\/p>\n From the law\u2019s inception, HUD and state and local agencies have operated in partnership through the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP). HUD\u2019s FHAP funds support\u00a0investigations of housing discrimination complaints,\u00a0lawsuit filings,\u00a0staff training, and community outreach.<\/p>\n The landmark law prohibits discrimination based on seven protected traits: (1) race, (2) color, (3) national origin, (4) religion, (5) sex, (6) familial status, (7) disability. Now HUD has threatened to decertify agencies wherever state laws expanded federal protected classes. In such locales, both complaint referrals and funding would be cut off.<\/p>\n But state AGs say the\u00a0FHA\u00a0Act The administration began fair housing\u00a0rule rollbacks<\/a>\u00a0in January, when HUD published its intent to remove its discriminatory effects regulations and leave to courts questions related to interpretations of disparate impact\u00a0liability under the Fair Housing Act.<\/p>\n That move took its cues from an April 2025\u00a0executive order<\/a>\u00a0(EO) entitled, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy that states in part, \u00a0\u201cIt is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the Constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals.\u201d<\/p>\n After analyzing\u00a0the EO, the Congressional\u00a0Black Caucus issued its\u00a0detailed opposition\u00a0saying in part, \u201cWithout disparate impact liability, the agencies will now have to prove malicious intent in order to punish bad faith actors, which requires a much higher burden of proof and will lead to more instances of unchecked discrimination.\u201d<\/p>\n Procedurally, proposed federal agency rules must allow a 30-day public comment period. As comments are reviewed, agencies can gain additional insights and opportunities to modify changes before finalization. By the time the 30-day public comment period on disparate impact expired, a total of\u00a0607 comments<\/a>\u00a0were filed \u2013 most in opposition to the change including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF).<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s clear the attacks on disparate impact are part of the administration\u2019s broader efforts to undermine civil rights law,\u201d said\u00a0Demetria McCain<\/a>, LDF\u2019s Director of Policy. \u201cRather than fulfilling the promise of the Fair Housing Act and making housing affordable and accessible to everyone, HUD is abdicating its responsibilities and leaving communities at risk of deep social and economic harm\u2026 And we call on HUD to immediately reverse course with its gutting of the regulation and fulfill its duty to enforce it.\u201d<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/s>and its later amendments establish a floor \u2014 not a ceiling \u2014\u00a0for protection against housing discrimination.<\/p>\n