US. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT February 9, 2011 ont ra MEMORANDUM FOR: FHEO Office Directors FHIEO Regional Di ‘Abbe ccsay for Enoncement and FROM: SUBJECT: Assessing Claims of Housing Discrimination against Vietims of | Domest Violence under the Fai Housing Act (FHAct) and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) 1 Purpose “This memorancum provides guidance to FHEO headquarters and fei staff on assessing claims by domestic vilence victims of housing discrimination under the Fair Housing Act (FHAct). Such claims are generilly based on ex, but may also involve other protected clases, in particular race o national origin. This memorandum discusses the legal theories behind such claims and provides examples of recent cases involving allegations of housing discrimination against domestic Yiolence victims, Thismemorandum also explains how the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)' protects some domestic violence victims from eviction, denial of housing, or termination ‘of assistance on the basis ofthe violence perpetrated by their abusers. H— Backgrount Survivors of damestic violence often face housing discrimination because oftheir history or the cts oftheir abusers, Congress has acknowledged that “[wJomen and families across the couniry are being discriminated aginst, denied aovess to, and even evicted from public and subsidized housing because oftheir status as vietims of domestic violenee."* Housing authorities and landlords eviet viet under zto-olerance rime polices, citing the violence ofa housebold ‘member, guest, or other person under the victim's “eontroL™ Vietims ae often evicted after repeated calls tothe police for domestic violence incidents because of allegations of disturbance to other tenants. Vietimsare also evicted because of property damage caused by their abusers. In "This puidance refers othe Vln Aint Women and Depart of astieReauorizatin Act of 2005 (VAWA, 2008). which aed prov sonst Tite VIC Housing Opportnities and Safty for Barred Women apd Chie”) data aplicble HUD prog. The egal version of VAWA, enced 199, dd at appl © HUD programs. Note aloha HUD rovents publabod i VAWA Fina ale. Sor HUD Programs: VieenceAgast Women Act. (Cnr Arnenmen al Rae, 7S Fe Reg. 8246 (Oxteber 27, 2010 SUS 5 1anc0) (edings publ inthe Violence Against Women Ac). No dat VAWA also pots ale sieinsof domestic volees Sec HUD Progra: VilonsAgtinst Women Act Conforming Ameen: Fal Fle 75 Fa Roe 66246, 96251 CVAWA 208 dos pce en. Although th ame othe statue refences aly ‘home, these oth ste kent rotctons are not erchasely apeable wo Wome) Soe 28 CFR 5.100‘many of these eases, averse housing action punishes victims forthe violence inflicted upon them This “double vietimizaion™ i unfair and, as explained inthis guidance, may be illegal ‘Statistics show that women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic viotence.* An ‘estimated 1-3 million women ate the victims of assault by an intimate parner each year and about 1 in women will experience intimate partner violence in their iftimes.* The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statisties found that 85% of vitims of domestic violence are women.” In 2009, women were about five times as ikely as nen to experience domestic violence" These statistics shows that discrimination against victims of domestic violence is almost always discrimination against women, “Thus, domestic violence survivors who are denied housing, evicted, or deprived of assistance based on the violence in theirhomes may have a cause of action for sex discrimination under the Fair Housing Act? In ation, certain other protected classes experience disproportionately igh rates of domestic violence. Forexample,Affican-American and Native American women experience higher rates of domestic violence than white women. Black women experience intimate partner violence a rate 35% higher than that of white females, and about 2 times the rate of women of bother races.” Native American women are vietims of violent crime, ineluding rape and sexual Assault, at more thin double the rate of other racial groups" Women of certain national origins and ‘mmigrant women also experience domestic violence at disproportionate ate. This means that victims of domestic vilence may also have a cause of action for race or national origin, discrimination under th: Fair Housing Act. Il, HUD's “Ore Strike” Rule and The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) In 200, the Department issued a rule allowing housing authorities and landlonds to evict tenants for criminal acvity committed by any household member or guest, commonly known asthe “one strike” rule” ‘Therule allows owners of public and Section 8 assisted housing to terminate a tenants lease because of criminal activity by “a tenant, any member of the tenant's household, a See Lenora M, Lapis, Diy Fc Hong Discrimination Again Vici of Domest Fence, 1 (espe, Soc Pot 377203) Are tecon hat en al caperence domestic violence. However, because ofthe wide ds invtimiaion, tnd because many FAC ing wl be based onthe Sagara pat of domestic vince on wea, We we eminne roneun ugh hs ld, ‘Czmer fx Dee Const Pescaton, National Centr olny revenon an Conta, Css of Taina Parner Vlence tia Wome Cred Sees (203) C'S Depurmet of adi Onc of hse Progra, Bae fst Stats Crime Dt i nimate Parner Finlence 19932001 2009. oer Taman & Mats! R Rand, US. Deere of sts, Criminal Victim, 209 (2010), © Teenie ene meses parts woul easy nthe sane manne and woukt bse on and any cher plicaeprtetl ches wer "Steven W. Pen, US.Detof htc, NCI203097, Barna ste Sutter 192-202 American Idan od Crim) ists on pect pops te Aneran Bar Ascaton Commision en Domestic Wisk, Survey of Recent ‘Sh oy png domes olen Pas Nansen Sot ad Eviton fr Dru Abus ard Oder Criminal Activity, 66 Fol. Reg. 25776 (May 24,201) amending DETR pes, 28984891. 9 He SR) en ee as one the" a)‘guest or another person under the tenants contol! that “threatens the health, safety, or right 10 ‘peaceful enjoyment of tie premises by ther residents (including property management staff residing on the premises); or... threatens the ealth, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment of theit residences by persons residing in the immediate vicinity ofthe premises." This policy would ‘seem to allow evictions of women forthe violent aets oftheir spouses, cohabiting partners, or Visitors, However, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2008 (VAWA)® prohtits such evitions in public housing, voucher, and Section 8 project-based programs, VAWA protects vietims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking!” \VAWA provides that being a victim of domestic violenee, dating violence, or staking is not basis for denial of assistance or admission to public or Section 8 tenant-based and project-based ‘assisted housing. Furth, incidents o treat of abuse will not be construed as serious or tepeated violations ofthe lease of as other “good cause” for termination ofthe assistance, tenancy, oF ‘occupancy rights ofa victim ofabuse. Moreover, VAWA prohibits the termination of assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights based on criminal activity directly relating to domestic violence, dating Violence or stalking, engaged in by a member of a tenant's household or any guest or other person “under the tenant's control if the tenant or immediate member ofthe tenant's family isa vitim of that domestic violenee, dating violence, or stalking” VAWA also allows owners and management agents to request cetifiation from a tenant that she is vietim of domestic violence, dating Violence, or stalking and that the incidence(s) of threatened or atutl abuse are bona fide in determining whether the protections afforded under \VAWA are applicable.” The Department has issued forms for housing authorities and landlords to use forsuch certification requests” but tenants may also present third-party documentation of the \ necrng $.100 " necrR 95850, "Bu 108-162, 19 Stat 2960 (2006). For the Departmen’ fal rule on VAWA, see HUD Programs: Vileoe “Agnins Womea Ac Conforing Ameo: Fil Re 7S Fd Rep 6246 (Oct 27 2010) (amending 24 CFR pis SSS 80,2, 85, 8, 45,61, 003, 90, 96, 882, nd 88). " Eachottiesc emis dened in VAWA and HUD corespoing rguasions Soe HUD Programs: Violence “Aganst Worn Act Conomning Ameadments: Final Rule 78 Fe Rey, 6246, 6258 ‘tthe excep thew provi 28 CER. § $2008), which ates tat VAWA doesnt ini the ory ofa PHA. owner, sr anageent agent ev ort a en's assistance if hey can demonstrate 0 ‘ran eines hea! ober ante otha employed or proving services a the pop iftha ean ‘Gmina. However, is ception ited by $5203). which sates that PHA, ownes,or management age ‘ar termite stance ol when here ep ther ction hat could educe cine the hea Other tions ‘ace wanfsing tet cere un rag the epettBom the propery, cating law enforcement 10 Inerenc pice presen or veloping whe plan fo esp he pope ae ce can th el remedies prevent the pepe fom ating ena rea PSBUSc$1457U(01 11) (pbc housing rogram) 42 US.C $1497Mee() (uber pores). HUD Heming Nowe 13 ans Fort HUD. 904, Craton of Domestic Violence. Dating Violence or Sain forse by ees nd nase agents dinning one of Muli Housing's projets Seton 8 progr and Fre HUD S106 he HUD-aproved Lese Addenda, or use wt the apple HUD model ee Tete covered projec +-sel Section 8 pogean. HUD Pubes adan Housing Notice 2006-42 ans fom HUD. stan Cofeston ef Domest Visne, Dating Visine or Sain, fr ws nthe Public Housing Program, sang Cie Votes Pognm (ching proettasd acer), Seco 8 Poet Based Cefeaton Program, ud Soston& Moderate Retsiitann Program. Se ako PI Notice 2006-23, Inpementtion ofthe Viens Against ‘Wow sm sie Depareen Reautoraton Ae of 2005abuse, including court records, police reports, or documentation signed by an employee, agent, or volunteer of a vitim service provider an attomey, or a medical professional from whom the vietim has sought assistance in addressing the abuse or the effects ofthe abuse.” Finally, VAWWA allows housing authorities and landlords obifurcate a lease in a domestic violence situation in order to viet the abuser and allow the victim to keep her housing. While VAWA provides important protections for victims of domestic violence, itis limited in scope. For example, it does not provide for damages.” In addition, VAWA does not provide an explicit private cause of action to women who are illegally evicted. Moreover, VAWA only protects women in public housing, voucher, and Section 8 project-based programs, so domestic violence victims in prisate housing have no similar protection ftom actions taken against them based on that violence. VAWA also may not protect a woman who does not provide the requisite documentation of violence while a claim of discrimination under the Fair Housing Act isnot dependent on complianze with the VAWA requirements. In short, when a victim is denied housing, evicted, or hus her assistance terminated because she has been a victim of domestic violence, the [FHAct might be implicated and we may need to investigate whether that denial is based on, for ‘example, race or sex. . Jr the Fair Housi Evidence, Unequal Disparate Impact Direct evidence. In some cases, landlords enforce fically discriminatory policies. These polices explicitly treat women differently from men. Such policies are often based on gender Stereotypes about abused women. For example, if landlord tell a female domestic violence ‘etm that he does not accept women with a history of domestic vilence as tenants because they always go back tothe men who abuse them, his statement is direct evidence of discrimination based ‘on sex, Investigations in direct evidence cases should focus on finding evidence about whether or hot the discriminatory statement was made, whether the statement was applied to others to identify “other potential victims, and whether it reflects a policy or practice by the landlord, ‘The usual ‘questions that address jurisdiction also apply. Unequal treatment, In some cases, a landlord engages in unequal treatment of victims of domestic violence in camparison to victims of other crimes. Ora landlord's seemingly gender- ‘neutral poliey may be usequally applied, resulting in diferent treatment based on sex. For example, ‘policy of evieting hovseholds fo erminalacivty may be applied selectively against women who have been abused by their partners and not against the male perpetrators ofthe domestic violence. Ifthere is evidence that women are being treated differently because of their stats a vietims of ‘domestic violence, an unequal treatment theory applies. Ifan investigator finds evidence of unequal treatment, the investigation shifts to discovering the respondents reasons fr the differences and USC. HBTUUMINC: ABUSE. § H37RCOKIK. S2USC. $14S7UNONBE AD USC $145 76X9K0). > Roms avaable unr VAWA ince for example, the dtonal PIM grievance proces. Soe HUD Programs: Yinlonce Agsint Women At Conforming Amendment Final Rue 75 Fe Reg. 6246, 4255, BWV VAWA 200 alloys overs ond PHA egos craton of dames violence rm itis te aw ao provides ht ovnersand PHA [att iscreton- may provide Denes toa nvidal bl cy the [nai sate or er comoborsingevidence” 42USCA § LS7AUXIND) 42 USCA, SL4S7(VeeKND).investigating each reasen to determine whether the evidence supports or refutes each reason. Ifa nondiseriminatory reason(s) is articulated, the investigation shifs again to examining the evidence to determine whether or not the reason(s) given is supported by the evidence or isa pretext for siscrimination.” Disparate impact. In some cases, there is no direct evidence of unequal treatment, but a facially neutral housing policy, procedure, or practice dsproportionately affects domestic violence vietims. In these eases, a disparate impact analysis is appropriate. Disparate impact eases often arise in the context of “zero-tolerance” policies, under which the entire household is evicted forthe ‘criminal ativity of onehouschold member. The theory is that, even when consistently applied, ‘women may be dispropotionaely affected by these policies because, a the overwhelming majority ‘of domestic violence vstims, women are often evicted as a result of the violence of their abusers. “There are four eps toa disparate impact analysis, First, the investigator must identify the specific policy procedute or practice ofthe andlor’ that is allegedly diseriminatory. This process means both th identification ofthe policy, procedure, or practice andthe examination of what types of erimes trigger the application ofthe policy. Second, the investigator must determine Whether or not that policy, procedure, or practice was consistently applied. This step i important ‘because it reveals the corect framework forthe investigation. Ifthe policy is applied unequally, then the proper analysis is unequal treatment, nt disparate impact If however, the policy was applied consistently to all tenants, then a disparate impact analysis applies, andthe investigation proceeds tothe next ste. “Thi, the invesigation must determine whether or not the particular policy, procedure, or practice has a signifcart adverse impact on domestic violence victims and ifs0, how many of those ‘etims were women (oF memibers ofa certain race or national origin). Statistical evidence is generally used to identi the seope of the impact ona group protected against discrimination. “These statistics should be as particularized as possible; they could demonstrate the impact ofthe poliey as to applicants fora specific building or property, or the impact on applicants or residents forall ofthe landlord's operations. For example, ina sex discrimination cae, the investigation may "uncover evidence that women in one apartment complex were evicted more often than men under a zero-tolerance crime plicy. It would not mater that the landlord did not intend to discriminate ‘against women, or thatthe policy was applied consistently. Proof of disparate impact claims is not anexact science, Courts have not agreed on any precise percentage or ratio that conclusively ‘establishes a prima face case. Rather, what constitutes a sufficiently disparate impact will depend ‘onthe particular fats and circumstances of each ease If the investigaton reveals a disparate impact based on sex, race, or national origin, the investigation then shits to eliciting the respondent's reasons for enforcing the poliey. tis etitieal to thoroughly investigate these reasons. Why was the policy enacted? What specific outcome was it meant to achieve or prevent? Were there any triggering events? Were any alternatives considered, and iso, why were they rejected? Ts there any evidence thatthe policy has been effective? What ‘constitutes a sufficient justification will vary according to the circumstances. In general, the investigation will examne whether or not the offered justification is real and supported by substantial business justification. or the purposes ofthis memorandum, itis important to See McDonnell Dolan Cop». Green, 411 US, 799 (1973) fra expat of th burden formas‘understand that an investigation must identify and evaluate the evidence supporting and refuting the justification, Even if there is sullicient justification far the policy, there may be a less discriminatory altemative available tothe respondent. disparate impact investigation must consider possible alteratve policies and analyze whether each policy would achieve the same objective with less tiseriminatory impact. For example, ina ease of disriminatory evietion under a zero-tolerance policy, landlord coulé adopt a policy of evicting only the wrongdoer and not insoceat vietims. ‘This policy would protect tenants without unfairly penalizing vietims of violence. In summary, an investigation ofa disparate impact case must seek evidence that a specific policy of the landlord’: caused a substantial, disproportionate, averse impact on a protected class fof persons. Proving a disparate impact claim will generally depend on statistical data demonstrating the disparity and a causal link between the policy and the disparity; discriminatory intent is inrelevant. \V. Fair Housiag Cases Involving Domestic Violence Eviction Cases. Victims are often served with eviction notices following domestic violence incidents, Landlords cite the danger posed to other tenants by the abuser, property damage caused by the abuser, or other reasons for eviction. Several cases have challenged these evictions as violations of VAWA or the Fair Housing Act. Alverav. CBM Greyp, Case No. 01-857 (D. Or, 2001).** The victim was asaulted by her ‘husband in their apartment. She obtained a retraining order against her husband, and he was subsequently arrested and jailed forthe assault. Sho provided a copy of the retaining order to the property manager. The property manager then served her with a 24-hour eviction notice based on the incident of domestis violence. ‘The notice specified: “You, someone in your contro, oF your pet, has seriously threatene to immediately inflict personal injury, or has inflicted personal injury upon the landlord or other tenants.” The victim then submitted an application for a one-bedroom. partment inthe stme building. Management denied the aplication and refused to accept her rent “After a second application, management finally approved her fora one-bedroom apartment, bt ‘wamed hee that “any type ofrecurence” of domestic violence would lead to her eviction, The viet fled a complain with HUD, which investigated her ease and issued a charge of iserimination against the apartment management group. She elected to pursue the casein federal ‘court, The partes later agred to setle the lawsuit. The consent deere, approved by the Oregon istrict court in 2001, equires thatthe management group agree not to “evict, or otherwise discriminate aginst texants because they have been victims of violence, including domestic violence” and change its policies accordingly. Employees ofthe management group must participate in education about diserimination and fur housing aw. The management group also ‘agreed to pay compensstory damages to the vit. ‘Warren v, Ypsilanti Housing Authority, Case No, 402-cv-40034 (E-D. Mich, 2003). The victim's ex-boyfriend broke into her house and physically abused her. She called the police to 1 copy ofthe detain acho hs er 6