Is housing discrimination illegal even if the action wasn’t intended?
According to the Fair Housing Act, yes.
Should the federal government go after errant housing providers in those scenarios? Well, that depends on the president.
In 2013, Barack Obama codified what’s known as the “disparate impact” rule, in other words, recognizing discriminatory practices not motivated by discriminatory intent. The Biden administration reinstated the rule. Now President Donald Trump seeks to roll it back by preventing agencies from investigating housing discrimination complaints.
Still, the disparate impact remains legal — federally and locally. And Illinois ensured extra protections by codifying disparate impact into state law. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has reduced the workforce in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and is antagonistic toward fair housing.
Let’s go back to the legal origins. In 1966, Martin Luther King Jr. spent time in the city for the Chicago Freedom Movement, which protested housing segregation and slums. Part of that campaign sent Black people to real estate offices, and agents told them they had no listings. Soon after, the campaign sent white people to the same offices, and agents gave them listings. After King’s assassination in 1968, Congress quickly passed the Fair Housing Act. The civil rights law prohibited discrimination against people trying to rent or buy a home. Race, sex and national origin are among the protected classes.
Today that King campaign is called “testing,” and fair housing organizations continue the practice. They send two people — one pair Black and one pair white — with otherwise similar profiles to visit the same housing provider. The volunteers are trained to see how they are treated and report back if discrimination occurs. State and local fair housing centers do a variety of education and fight discrimination — to the chagrin of the Trump administration, which has also sought to gut their funding. To advance fair housing, HUD is a primary source of financing. Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, along with other states, filed a lawsuit to challenge the attacks. Some contracts have been reinstated, but not every center received back money.
“A lot of our worst fears have kind of already happened. We know that it’s going to take at least a decade to rebuild the federal infrastructure to what it was before with the number of federal workers,” said Emily Coffey of the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights. “What we had a couple of years ago was never enough. We are still one of the most segregated cities in the country. What worries me the most is that we won’t be able to sustain what we have, and rebuilding that is so much more challenging than just weathering a storm.”
To counter the political climate, fair housing groups have formed the Illinois Housing Equity Collective, which seeks $5 million from the state for fair housing enforcement. So far philanthropy has contributed to the collective.
Michael Chavarria leads HOPE Fair Housing Center, which serves DuPage and Kane counties and parts of Northern Illinois. The mixed messaging from the federal government has prevented growth and also caused rearranging their budget while waiting on reimbursements. He doesn’t want to tap into reserves to cover a bill when the federal government promised that money.
“Just last year we held over 40 events that were targeted at training individuals, be it housing seekers, housing providers, local government. We reached about 3,500 people through our online educational campaigns. We reached almost 750,000 people across Illinois. So we really aim to prevent discrimination by making sure everyone knows their rights and responsibilities. We do not want to have to sue people,” Chavarria said.
Illinois finds itself once again on the front lines of protecting residents — see reproductive, immigration or First Amendment rights. And now must add fair housing, which Trump pushed against just last week by refusing to sign a bipartisan housing affordability bill.
The reason? He first wants Congress to approve the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE America Act — legislation designed to create more inequity and burn democracy to the ground.
Natalie Y. Moore is a senior lecturer at Northwestern University.
