How Eviction Brands Renters With a Scarlet Letter

While many might assume that racial housing segregation is a thing of the past, predatory practices by landlords keep it alive in communities across the country.

Landlords commonly use “no-evictions” policies that unfairly shut out families from housing for years. These policies broadly exclude applicants with an “eviction” — without distinguishing between eviction filings and judgments or considering individual circumstances. Instead, these policies automatically reject all applicants from housing if they have any connection to an eviction case, even if, for example, the eviction case was dismissed or very old, or the family is now financially stable.

American Civil Liberties Union

Why Fair Housing is Key to Systemic Equality | ACLU

Here’s how discrimination continues to impact access to housing today, and why we're fighting to ensure all people have equal access.

Since our inception in 1968, HOPE Fair Housing (HOPE) has dedicated itself to eliminating housing discrimination in Illinois by standing at the forefront to challenge policies and practices that create barriers to housing choice for residents throughout Cook County and beyond. Blanket bans on people with arrest and conviction records, selective enforcement of crime-free and nuisance-free ordinances, and source of income discrimination all continue to impact Black households in Cook County and across the United States.

Now, we are taking on “no-evictions” policies as a significant barrier to fair housing for all families. With the help of the ACLU, the ACLU of Illinois, and the National Housing Law Project, we filed a civil rights complaint this week with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) against one of the largest operators of rental housing in Oak Park, Illinois. We argue that Oak Park Apartments’ “No-Evictions” policy both discriminates against Black renters and Black women renters and perpetuates and reinforces residential segregation.

According to an expert analysis, between September 2010 to March 2023, A housing provider that enforces a policy that denies the opportunity to rent to anyone who has an eviction filing or judgment is disproportionately denying housing to Black households and Black women in particular. With evictions in Cook County at the highest rate they have been in years, “No-Evictions” policies will continue to block families from new housing opportunities.

There is no justification for automatically rejecting all housing applicants because they had some connection to an eviction case. While housing providers can choose to complete tenant screenings, applying discriminatory criteria — such as those used by Oak Park Apartments — violates fair housing law. We can no longer ignore the consequences of these policies and the communities they harm.

American Civil Liberties Union

Quiz: What You Need to Know About Fair Housing | ACLU

Housing discrimination is rampant around the country — take our quiz on how it has been perpetuated over the years and what we’re doing to fight.

Oak Park Apartments’ “no-evictions” policy is even more alarming because it perpetuates segregation in Oak Park. For more than 50 years, the village of Oak Park has made deliberate efforts to build and maintain a racially integrated community. Blanket tenant screening policies that deny applicants with “any eviction” the opportunity to rent an apartment are a threat to these efforts and contribute to racial segregation in Cook County.

All communities, and especially those dedicated to promoting integration such as Oak Park, deserve better than landlord policies that deny Black women the human right to housing opportunities. The residents of Oak Park should demand swift policy changes now from any housing provider that may be employing a “no evictions” blanket ban policy.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia L. Fudge has called on the fair housing movement to take action to correct the systems and barriers that are causing harm to our communities. We have responded, and trust that HUD will use its investigative and enforcement authority to eliminate these harmful policies in Oak Park, Cook County, and across the country.

We need you with us to keep fighting

Donate today

Trump's Attempt to Unilaterally Control State and Local Funding is Dangerous, Dumb, and Undemocratic

The Trump administration has not been subtle in its desire to use federal funding for political punishment. Whether threatening to cut off grants to sanctuary cities, to block financial assistance to states that push back against the president’s demands, or to freeze all federal grants and loans for social services across the country, Trump and his allies want us to believe they can wield the federal budget like a weapon. The reality is that the administration’s ability to withhold or condition funding is far more limited than they let on. The Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law stand firmly in the way of this brazen abuse of presidential power. Trump’s Attempted Funding Freeze? Blocked Immediately A week into his second administration, Trump attempted to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans that fund a vast array of critical services already approved by Congress. If allowed to go into effect, this unprecedented and far-reaching...

Documents Reveal Confusion and Lack of Training in Texas Execution

As Texas seeks to execute Carl Buntion today and Melissa Lucio next week, it is worth reflecting on the grave and irreversible failures that occurred when the state executed Quintin Jones on May 19, 2021. For the first time in its history — and in violation of a federal court’s directive and the Texas Administrative Code — Texas excluded the media from witnessing the state’s execution of Quintin Jones. In the months that followed, Texas executed two additional people without providing any assurance that the underlying dysfunction causing errors at Mr. Jones’ execution were addressed. This is particularly concerning given that Texas has executed far more people than any other state and has botched numerous executions. The First Amendment guarantees the public and the press have a right to observe executions. Media access to executions is a critical form of public oversight as the government exerts its power to end a human life. Consistent with Texas policy, two reporters travelled t...

The Supreme Court Declined a Protestors' Rights Case. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a case, Mckesson v. Doe , that could have affirmed that the First Amendment protects protest organizers from being held liable for illegal actions committed by others present that organizers did not direct or intend. The high court’s decision to not hear the case at this time left in place an opinion by the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, that said a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others based on nothing more than a showing of negligence. Across the country, many people have expressed concern about how the Supreme Court’s decision not to review, or hear, the case at this stage could impact the right to protest. The ACLU, which asked the court to take up the case, breaks down what the court’s denial of review means. What Happened in Mckesson v. Doe? The case, Mckesson v. Doe , was brought by a police officer against DeRay Mckesson , a prominent civil rights activi...

Search This Blog