Antidiscrimination Law

Websites held to be public accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and must be made accessible through screen reading technology

/ Antidiscrimination Law

The Ninth Circuit held that websites are public accommodations within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101, (and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code §51) and must be made accessible to blind persons through screen reading technology. Robles v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC , 913 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2019), cert. denied, 140 S.Ct. 122 (2019).

Bed & breakfast owner held to have no religious freedom right to refuse to provide lodging to a lesbian couple protected by state public accommodations law

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Religious Freedom

In a case decided several months before the Supreme Court’s ruling in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colo. Civ. Rights Comm’n, 138 S.Ct. 1719 (2018), the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court held that there is no constitutional right to an exemption from a public accommodation law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, even if the accommodation is a small bed and breakfast business. Cervelli v. Aloha Bed & Breakfast,415 P.3d 919 (Haw. Ct. App. 2018). Nor did the law violate the owner’s rights to privacy or intimate association.

Condominium’s policy of segregating pool hours by gender violates fair housing laws

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Condominiums and Homeowners Associations, Fair Housing Act

The Third Circuit held that a condo association that adopted sex-segregated pool hours to accommodate its Orthodox Jewish residents in an “over-55” age-restricted condominum violated the Fair Housing Act both by denying access to the common area based on sex and by giving women only 3.5 hours to swim on weeknights compared to 16.5 hours given to men. Curto v. Country Place Condominium Ass’n, 921 F.3d 405 (3d Cir. 2019). It did not matter that the motive was benign; what mattered was the denial of access to common areas on the basis of sex on unequal “terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling,” 42 U.S.C. §3604(b). The Court did not reach the question of whether sex-segregated hours might be lawful if equal time was provided to men and women but a concurring Judge Julio Fuentes did, arguing that any limit on access would be discriminatory.

To avoid engaging in discrimination, Facebook changes its policy that had allowed advertisers for housing, employment, and credit to select which users could see their ads

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Fair Housing Act, Leaseholds, Mortgages, Real Estate Transactions

Responding to a lawsuit filed by the National Fair Housing Alliance and others that alleged discrimination against families with children, women, persons with disabilities, and on the basis of national origin, Facebook announced changes in its policies to avoid engaging in discriminatory advertisements. Brakkton Booker, After Lawsuits, Facebook Announces Changes to Alleged Discriminatory Ad Targeting, Mar. 19, 2019. See also Tracy Jan & Elizabeth Dwoskin, HUD is reviewing Twitter’s and Google’s ad practices as part of housing discrimination probe, Wash. Post, Mar. 28, 2019.

City of Miami has standing to challenge discriminatory mortgage lending policies of banks

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Fair Housing Act

On remand from a Supreme Court ruling that cities can be “aggrieved persons” injured by discriminatory housing practices, Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami, 137 S.Ct. 1296 (U.S. 2017), the Eleventh Circuit held that the City of Miami had alleged sufficient injury to have standing to bring a Fair Housing Act claim against banks that steered black and Latino borrowers into unaffordable subprime loans that resulted in a wave of foreclosures that affected city finances by decreasing property values and then tax revenues. City of Miami v. Wells Fargo & Co., 2019 WL 1966943 (11th Cir. 2019). The opinion did not find that Miami had proven its claim, just that it had alleged sufficient injury to be able to bring the claim in federal court.

Supreme Court to decide whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity are forms of “sex” discrimination under federal laws

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Fair Housing Act, Religious Freedom

The Supreme Court accepted certiorari in three cases (Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC) and will determine whether federal employment discrimination laws that ban “sex” discrimination cover discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity. The rulings in these cases are very likely to apply to the Fair Housing Act. Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc.,883 F.3d 100 (2d Cir. 2018), cert. granted sub. nom Altitude Express, Inc., v. Zarda, 2019 WL 1756678 (U.S. 2019), held that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination both because it is either the sex of the employee or that their potential or actual partners that defines sexual orientation. Bostock v. Clayton County Bd. of Commissioners,723 Fed. Appx. 964 (11th Cir. 2018), cert. granted, 2019 WL 1756677 (U.S. 2019) came to the opposite conclusion. EEOC v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral …

Supreme Court to decide whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity are forms of “sex” discrimination under federal laws Read More »

Fifth Circuit rules that landlord rejection of Section 8 housing voucher recipients does not violate the Fair Housing Act by imposing a disparate impact on the basis of race

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Fair Housing Act, Leaseholds

Persons in need of financial assistance to afford housing are in a variety of categories of persons protected by the Fair Housing Act. African Americans are more likely than white persons to be poor; women of all races are more likely to be poor than men; persons with disabilities are more likely to need government assistance than those who are temporarily abled; and children are much more likely to be poor than adults. It would seem easy to show that refusing to rent to persons who are eligible for and who receive housing vouchers from the federal government (so-called Section 8 certificates) causes a disparate impact based on race, disability, sex, and familial status that may be unlawful under the Fair Housing Act unless the impact can be justified by a sufficient strong business objective that cannot be achieved in a less discriminatory way. However, the 5th Circuit rejected a …

Fifth Circuit rules that landlord rejection of Section 8 housing voucher recipients does not violate the Fair Housing Act by imposing a disparate impact on the basis of race Read More »

Claim of discrimination in public accommodation against Arab-American customers upheld based on race, ethnicity & national origin

/ Antidiscrimination Law

The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) has found a violation of the state’s public accommodatoin law on the basis of race, national origin, and ethnicity when a manager of a Subway store stated to an Arab-American family: ““I’m the manager of Subway.  You are banned from our store.  We don’t need people like you.  Why don’t you go back to your  f**king country and learn how to speak English.  We don’t serve foreigners like you.  God Bless.” MCAD v. 2 Belsub Corp., 15-BPA-101141.

Condo owner may be liable for wrongful death of neighbor when he rented his unit to his brother knowing he was a dangerous sex offender

/ Antidiscrimination Law, Condominiums and Homeowners Associations, Nuisance

A court has held that a landlord may be liable for wrongful death of a neighboring condo owner if he rents his unit to his brother, knowing he is a sex offender who often stops using needed medication and is capable of violent outburst when he did not use his medication, fails to warn the neighbors of his presence, and the landlord’s brother kills a neighboring owner.  Steele v. Kings Way Condominium Trust, 2018 Mass. Super. LEXIS 103 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2018).

Scroll to Top