红杏视频

Just days after being assaulted in her home, L.B., a client at the 红杏视频 Women鈥檚 Rights Project, was given 14 days to leave her home. Another client, N.S., was denied housing under a blanket 鈥渘o-evictions鈥� policy that disproportionately excludes Black women. When fair housing protections fail, women 鈥� especially low-income women, women of color, and survivors of gender-based violence 鈥� can lose access to safe, stable housing. Our clients are identified by their initials to protect their privacy.

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 (FHA) was meant to prevent exactly this. The law opened the door for people long shut out of housing opportunities, regardless of identity or background. To advance access to fair housing, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the 红杏视频 have relied on disparate impact liability: a civil rights enforcement tool for challenging policies and practices that cause disproportionate, adverse effects on certain groups, regardless of discriminatory intent.

Just last month, however, the Trump administration moved to end this crucial protection. HUD Secretary Scott Turner 鈥渢o end the agency鈥檚 use of disparate-impact theory in fair housing and related civil rights enforcement鈥� and to send these critical protections to 鈥渢he ash heap of history.鈥� Now, we risk losing an essential tool to push back against the same policies that jeopardized housing for L.B., N.S., and other victims of gender-based discrimination.

Safe and stable housing is central to nearly every aspect of a person鈥檚 life. Where you live often impacts where you work, where your children go to school, your access to grocery stores, childcare, and other major resources, and even the safety and well-being of yourself and your family. Our clients at the 红杏视频 Women鈥檚 Rights Project know firsthand how essential these protections are to their ability to survive and thrive.

When L.B. was served with eviction papers after being assaulted, the 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of Pennsylvania brought a federal fair housing action. We challenged the local nuisance ordinance that pressured landlords to evict tenants for calling the police, even when they experienced domestic violence. Soon after, HUD filed a fair housing complaint because of this policy鈥檚 disparate impact on women survivors, and as a result, and the unjust ordinance was repealed.

For N.S., who was denied housing because of a five-year-old eviction case that was ultimately dismissed, the 红杏视频 and our partners also successfully settled a fair housing action. Although blanket 鈥渘o-evictions鈥� policies impose unjust barriers for all tenants, these bans disproportionately exclude Black renters, and particularly Black women, from accessing housing. Since then, the 红杏视频 and its partners for Black women and other women of color across the country, including by filing a civil rights complaint with HUD.

These fair housing protections have been especially essential to women and the broader movement for gender justice and equality. Women have to obtaining safe and affordable housing. Discriminatory housing policies restrict women鈥檚 ability to access rental housing or to . It can jeopardize housing stability for survivors of gender-based violence who are disproportionately women. These barriers are for Black women and other women of color, low-income women with children, women with disabilities, LGBTQ+ women, and other women who face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. Critically, gender-based discrimination in housing across the country 鈥� impairing the ability of women to achieve economic justice and full equality in society.

The existing disparate impact rule, which codifies existing disparate impact standards under the Fair Housing Act, has been long recognized by HUD and numerous courts, including the Supreme Court, as essential to fulfilling the Fair Housing Act鈥檚 purpose. In 2013, HUD formalized disparate impact liability to address policies that appear 鈥渘eutral鈥� but disproportionately deny housing to women and other marginalized groups. The Supreme Court then affirmed HUD鈥檚 position in 2015. And in the decade since, numerous courts have applied the disparate impact rule in a variety of housing discrimination cases.

But under the Trump administration, HUD is stepping back from its role of fair housing enforcement. Beyond rescinding the disparate impact rule, the agency major investigations into systemic housing discrimination and segregation. HUD , including in its Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, and then cited staffing reductions to halt fair housing investigations. Moreover, essential guidance on disparate impact discrimination, such as criminal record screening, source-of-income discrimination, and digital housing and credit advertising, .

For survivors of gender-based violence, the vast majority of whom are women, that 75% of the staff working to enforce housing protections under the Violence Against Women Act were also gutted. Because of and , survivors could also lose access to lifesaving resources like emergency housing, legal support, and medical care. Trump is even rolling back protections against lending discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, .

Together, these attacks harm the ability of women, especially women of color and other marginalized identities, to achieve economic stability and be full and equal participants in society. Without the disparate impact rule, we lose an essential tool in advancing the broader movement for gender justice and equality. HUD must withdraw its proposed rule and commit to fulfilling its role by preserving women鈥檚 access to safe and stable housing.