Race-Focused Dorms at UConn and UMN Challenged at HUD by Equal Protection Project
Under the Fair Housing Act, “this kind of ‘steering’ toward or away from housing based on race is strictly prohibited … even if the housing program does not physically bar members of other racial or ethnic groups from participating.”
The Equal Protection Project (EqualProtect.org) has challenged over 275 institutions regarding over 800 programs that discriminate in the name of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. The breadth of DEI discrimination is far more sweeping than people realize – race- and ethnicity-based preferences remain pervasive.
Most of our challenges have focused on programs and scholarships in higher education, K-12, and medical schools, and mostly at the U.S. Department of Education, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Justice.
We have also started to focus on housing segregation in higher ed, done under the guise of identity-themed housing, which is deeply interwoven with the group identity ideology that fuels other discrimination. We touched on that in a recent filing at DoEd (requesting a referral to DOJ), where the housing was temporary and adjacent to other discriminatory programming, Hispanic-Only Conference and Housing at USC and Loyola Marymount Challenged by Equal Protection Project.
Our most recent filings, against the University of Connecticut (UConn) and the University of Minnesota (UMN) Twin Cities campus, focus on violations of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) for longer-term dormitory housing, and were filed at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which has jurisdiction over FHA violations.
The legal bases for each complaint are similar, with the core concept of unlawful “steering” by promoting housing as intended for a particular race or ethnicity. Such steering under the FHA is unlawful even if other races and ethnicities are not absolutely barred – the point is that the steering (sometimes referred to as “signaling”) is likely to dissuade non-target groups from participating. The FHA is particularly powerful in this regard because even if a school adds perfunctory exculpatory language – such as “open to all” – it is not a defense.
Here is the key legal discussion from the Complaints on why race- and ethnicity-based steering is unlawful:
Enacted as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the FHA was intended “to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States.”2 The FHA prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, and national origin in the sale or rental of housing. The FHA applies to a broad assortment of housing, both public and private, including single-family homes, apartments, condominiums, and mobile homes.3 Courts have also concluded that the FHA applies to college dormitories.4
Under the FHA, it is unlawful to “make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination.”5 Under applicable Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). regulations enforcing the FHA, this kind of “steering” toward or away from housing based on race is strictly prohibited.6 Steering liability attaches even if the housing program does not physically bar members of other racial or ethnic groups from participating.
Specifically, where ads or other publicly available information to potential applicants would cause a reasonable non-member of a given group to conclude that a given program is not intended for them, likely causing them to forgo applying, such steering violates the FHA. Even subtle messaging can convey these kinds of discriminatory preferences and steer potential applicants away. Ragin v. New York Times Co., 923 F.2d 995, 999–1000 (2d Cir. 1991); Jancik v. Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev., 44 F.3d 553, 556 (7th Cir. 1995); Housing Opportunities Made Equal, Inc. v. Cincinnati Enquirer, Inc., 943 F.2d 644, 646 (6th Cir.1991); Spann v. Colonial Village, Inc., 899 F.2d 24 (D.C.Cir.1990); United States v. Hunter, 459 F.2d 205, 215 (4th Cir. 1981)….
Most obviously, these programs violate the Fair Housing Act because they classify and promote university housing based on race and national origin. Even if HUD were to conclude that the programs are not formally exclusionary, they independently violate the Act’s prohibition on discriminatory housing statements and racial steering.
Steering is “not an outright refusal to rent to a person within a class of people protected by the statute; rather it consists of efforts to deprive a protected home seeker of housing opportunities in certain locations.” Fair Housing Congress v. Weber, 993 F. Supp. 1286, 1293 (C.D.Cal.1997). Instead, as applicable here, illegal steering consists of “communicating to any prospective [resident] that he or she would not be comfortable or compatible with existing residents of a community, neighborhood or development.”19 Under this standard, no discriminatory intent is required by the seller or renter. Jancik v. HUD, 44 F.3d 553, 556 (7th Cir. 1995). Instead, whether a given statement constitutes illegal steering is whether the statement suggests a preference to “the ordinary reader or listener.” United States v. Hunter, 459 F.2d 205, 215 (4th Cir.); Ragin, 923 F.2d at 1002 (An “ordinary reader is neither the most suspicious nor the most insensitive of our citizenry.”); Hous. Rts. Ctr. v. Donald Sterling Corp., 274 F. Supp. 2d 1129, 1138 (C.D. Cal.), aff’d sub nom., Hous. Rts. Ctr. v. Sterling, 84 F. App’x 801 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting Ragin, 923 F.2d at 999.
We then documents the FHA violations at each school, with links, archived links, and screenshots:
UConn
We bring this complaint and request for investigation against UConn for operating three discriminatory university housing programs that classify students on the basis of race, color, or national origin, in violation of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”). These programs are:
• the “ScHOLA²RS House,” promoted as being for Black male students;
• the “BSOUL House,” promoted as being for Black female students; and
• “La Comunidad Intelectual,” promoted as being for Hispanic/Latino students***
The information UConn provides on its housing website describing its discriminatory Learning Communities Programs clearly suggests a preference for a particular race, color and/or national origin. This information steers individuals (“ordinary readers”) towards and away from dormitory housing based on these preferences in violation of the FHA. This is true even if UConn in fact has no discriminatory intent.
UMN
We bring this complaint and request for investigation against UMN for operating four discriminatory university housing programs on its Twin Cities campus that classify students on the basis of race, color, or national origin, in violation of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”). These programs are:
• the “Huntley House,” promoted as being for Black male students;
• “Charlotte’s Home,” promoted as being for Black female students;
• “CASA SOL,” promoted as being for Hispanic/Latino students; and
• “Tsev Hmoob,” promoted as being for Hmong American students.***
The information UMN publishes on its housing websites describing these discriminatory Living Learning Communities clearly communicates preferences based on race, color, and/or national origin. To an ordinary reader, UMN’s descriptions would convey that certain residential communities are intended for members of particular racial or ethnic groups, thereby steering students toward or away from specific dormitory housing on those bases in violation of the FHA. This is true regardless of whether UMN acts with discriminatory intent and regardless of whether UMN physically bars students who don’t meet the racial or ethnic description.
The filings have received good press coverage so far.
UConn has been issuing the following media statement asserting the housing programs “open to all students” and “no student is denied access … based on their identity.” As described above, that’s not a legal defense to steering:
“UConn does not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, or any other aspect of identity, including in our on-campus housing. UConn is home to nearly 20 different interdisciplinary living and learning communities within on-campus housing, all of which are organized around students who may have similar interests, backgrounds, or academic pursuits, including the three that were specifically named. However, these communities are open to all students and no student is denied access to these communities based on their identity.”
WTNH TV covered the story on air and on its website:
UConn’s Learning Community Programs allegedly encourage, and/or deter,
students from dormitory housing based on race, color, national origin, and therefore violate
multiple provisions of federal law, according to the complaint. Fair Housing Act is mentioned throughout the complaint.“Even if HUD were to conclude that the programs are not formally exclusionary, they independently violate the Act’s prohibition on discriminatory housing statements and racial steering,” the complaint states.
The Equal Protection Project also alleges UConn is in violation of Title VI, which prohibits intentional discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any “program or activity” that receives federal financial assistance.
The complaint states all three programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Under the clause, such discriminatory programs “are constitutional only if they are narrowly tailored measures that further compelling governmental interests.”
The Equal Protection Project said UConn failed to meet those requirements.
Connecticut Insider, in an article that ran as several other affiliated Connecticut websites,
The University of Connecticut is facing a federal civil rights complaint accusing the school of running campus housing programs that a legal advocacy nonprofit claims to be race-based dormitories for Black and Hispanic students….
“Regardless of whether UConn intends to discriminate, or whether non-black students are turned away, the program’s title and description likely steer non-black students away from participating and violates federal law,” the complaint stated.
The complaint alleges the three housing programs violated the Fair Housing Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
UConn spokesman Michael Enright said in a statement the university does not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, or any other aspect of identity, including in their on-campus housing.
The UMN complaint was covered by Fox 9 Minneapolis:
Reminder: we are a small organization going up against powerful and wealthy government and private institutions devoted to DEI discrimination. Donations are greatly needed and appreciated.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
We will remind the Democrats that, regardless of their pervasive and highly selective amnesia, “no one is above the law.” Don’t like it? Change it. Not be above it or take it into your own hands.
Why is it always Minnesota?
Since I’m married to a Lutheran Minnesotan , I’ll tell you why. The Lutheran church suffers from what Professor Gad Saad calls “suicidal empathy”. Lutherans are overwhelmed by guilt of success and a good life,, so much so that they want to. cure the ills of the world by the importation of people who have no desire to integrate into the American way of life. Most of these people simply want to continue their tribal ways of theft, deception and violence. It’s weird but true.
When I’m around my spouse’s family at holiday time I get dizzy from all the eye rolls I perform. There is not a nicer group of people than Lutheran Minnesotans, but boy are they naive to a fault when it comes to the world outside of Lake Wobegon.
Garrison Keeler got a raw deal.
Or, Commiefornia, Illinois, Oregon, Washington State, New York State, Vermont, Massachusetts, etc, etc
Why did you capitalize “black” in your filings?
The BSOUL House. Sounds like babylon bee.
Professor, your employer Cornell University has such segregated housing for students. Why don’t you start at home?
Really, what constitutes “steering?” It all seems kind of vague and subjective.
If Rush Week refreshments at one dorm consists of watercress sandwiches and tea, but fried chicken at another, is Harmeet going to get involved?
I’ll admit it, the first thingChula! in this post was the photo of the reporter Brittany Taylor. ¡Que chula!
This is a simple mystery to solve. Since we’ve been assured by All The Most Virtuous People that ‘disparate impact’ is ipso facto proof of racism, all that’s necessary is to check the race/ethnicity of the population of the suspect dorms and confirm that it’s equivalent to the racial/ethnic distribution of the population as a whole. Easy peasy.