Lawsuit Challenges Discriminatory Housing Policy in Chesterfield County, Virginia
Housing discrimination takes different forms in different eras. More than fifty years after the passage of the Fair Housing Act (FHA), it’s rare to see an advertisement for housing that says “Whites Only.” But in Chesterfield County, Virginia, where a Black resident is almost three times as likely as a white resident to have a criminal record, an explicit policy barring any individual with a conviction from housing has a similar effect.
Sterling Glen is an apartment complex in a white neighborhood in Chesterfield County. Since at least 2017, Sterling Glen has explicitly stated on its application that no person with a felony conviction, regardless of how long ago it was, can live there. It also bars applicants with many kinds of misdemeanor offenses, including drug convictions. Bans like these not only pose a barrier to those reentering the community after incarceration, but those with records who have been living and working in the community for years or even decades. A lack of access to permanent housing can also increase rates of recidivism, perpetuating cycles of criminalization and ultimately making communities less secure.
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Sterling Glen’s housing policy discriminates against Black renters
in a mostly white area of Chesterfield County
Percentage Black Pop.
35 - 89% Black
20 - 35%
15 - 20%
10 - 15%
0 - 10%
Sterling Glen
Apartments
Note: By census tract
Source: 2010 Decennial Census; virginiacourtdata.com
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Sterling Glen’s housing policy discriminates
against Black renters in mostly White area
Sterling Glen
Apartments
Percentage Black Pop.
10 - 15%
15 - 25%
25 - 35%
35 - 89%
0 - 10%
Note: By census tract
Source: 2010 Decennial Census; virginiacourtdata.com
Chesterfield County, VA
Sterling Glen’s housing policy
discriminates against Black renters
in mostly white area
Sterling Glen
Apartments
Percentage Black Pop.
10 - 15%
15 - 25%
25 - 35%
35 - 89%
0 - 10%
Note: By census tract
Source: 2010 Decennial Census; virginiacourtdata.com
<!--*/
*/
/*-->*/
These numbers mirror national trends. As a result of our country’s bloated criminal justice system, more than 625,000 individuals are released from prison each year. Nationally, approximately 19 million people have at least one felony conviction and 100 million people, nearly one-third of the population, have a criminal record. But the impact of criminal convictions is not evenly distributed throughout the population.
People of color are disproportionately represented at every stage of our criminal justice system, including among those with criminal records. As a result, any policy that excludes people with criminal records from housing disproportionately harms people of color. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has recognized that excluding people with criminal records can be considered race discrimination under the FHA because “African Americans and Hispanics are arrested, convicted, and incarcerated at rates disproportionate to their share of the general population.”
In Chesterfield County, individuals who are Black represented 46% of those convicted of a felony between 2007 and 2017, despite only accounting for 22% of the population. Put another way: there are 23 people with a felony conviction per 1,000 white people in Chesterfield County, but 65 people with a felony conviction per 1,000 Black people in the same geographic area.
Black People Make Up 22% of Chesterfield County
Population, but 46% of People with Felony Convictions
Population
People with Felony
Convictions
Black people
Non-Black people
Source: 2010 Decennial Census; virginiacourtdata.com
Black People Make Up 22% of
Chesterfield County Population, but
46% of People with Felony Convictions
Population
People with Felony
Convictions
Black people
Non-Black people
Source: 2010 Decennial Census; virginiacourtdata.com
Black People Make Up 22% of
Chesterfield County Population,
but 46% of People with Felony
Convictions
Black people
Non-Black people
Population
People with Felony
Convictions
Source: 2010 Decennial Census;
virginiacourtdata.com
<!--*/
*/
/*-->*/
As a result of these dramatic disparities, Sterling Glen’s blanket ban is impermissible under both the federal FHA and Virginia state law.These laws not only prohibit housing providers from intentionally discriminating on the basis race, sex, disability, or other protected status, but also bar the application of any policy that has a disparate impact on one of these protected groups.
In place of blanket bans like Sterling Glen’s, the FHA requires that housing providers consider each housing applicant as an individual. By looking at not only the existence of a conviction, but the nature of their conviction or conduct, how long ago it occurred, and any evidence of rehabilitation, housing providers can make more fair decisions. Taking into account a prospective applicant’s post-conviction and post-release conduct, history as a tenant, and other similar factors provide important context into whether housing an applicant poses a risk to health or safety of the community.
The ACLU and ACLU of Virginia, in partnership with Relman, Dane & Colfax PLLC, a civil rights law firm with expertise in housing discrimination, are challenging the discriminatory blanket ban instituted at Sterling Glen on behalf of Housing Opportunities Made Equal (HOME), a Richmond-based nonprofit organization. HOME’s mission is to ensure equal access to housing for all by engaging in education and outreach, counseling individuals who face discrimination, undertaking investigations to uncover discrimination, and initiating enforcement actions.
Through this lawsuit, HOME aims to ensure every person has the opportunity to access safe, decent, affordable housing, regardless of their criminal history. The categorical exclusion of individuals with a criminal history has a discriminatory impact, is an ineffective means of assessing risk to residents and property, and violates both federal and state law. All housing providers should comply with the legal obligation to give all applicants the opportunity to access housing by considering them as individuals—not merely statistics.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Racial Justice
ACLU Statement on House AI Task Force ReportACLU Statement on House AI Task Force Report
WASHINGTON — Today, the House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence (AI) issued its final report, marking an important step in recognizing the serious risks of discrimination and bias posed by AI systems — particularly in law enforcement’s use of facial recognition technology. The report recognizes that discrimination and bias may arise in AI systems due to their design, training data, or failures by end users. The report also investigates the complex considerations around deepfakes, open AI systems, and free speech, and urges Congress to pass narrow legislation to address concrete harms. In response to the House AI Task Force final report, Cody Venzke, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, issued the following statement: “The ACLU commends the Task Force for recognizing that AI systems are harming people right now through discriminatory outcomes and supercharged surveillance. Curbing those abuses of AI is not a partisan issue, and more concrete action is needed to protect civil rights, while maintaining states’ authority to build on those protections. The Task Force is appropriately cautious when wrestling with issues around deepfakes, open-source AI, digital identity, and other issues, recognizing that legislators should consider a wide array of tailored tools to address real, not speculative, harms while respecting civil rights and civil liberties.” The House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence report can be found here. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Racial Justice
Human Rights
Why the Fight for Racial Justice is a Human Rights IssueWhy the Fight for Racial Justice is a Human Rights Issue
On International Human Rights Day, the ACLU is advocating for a long-sought after reparatory justice to end the continued abuses against Black and brown communities. -
Press ReleaseOct 2024
National Security
+2 Issues
ACLU Warns that Biden-Harris Administration Rules on AI in National Security Lack Key ProtectionsACLU Warns that Biden-Harris Administration Rules on AI in National Security Lack Key Protections
WASHINGTON — The Biden-Harris administration today released its National Security Memorandum on Artificial Intelligence (AI), establishing guidelines for how the U.S. government uses AI in national security programs, such as counterterrorism, intelligence, homeland security, and defense. The use of AI to automate and expand national security activities poses some of the greatest dangers to people’s lives and civil liberties. Agencies are increasingly exploring the use of AI in decisions about who to surveil, who to stop and search at the airport, who to add to government watchlists, and even who is a military target. While the government’s policy includes some important steps forward — such as requiring national security agencies to better track and assess their AI systems for risks and prohibiting a subset of dangerous AI uses — it falls far short in other critical areas, leaving glaring gaps with respect to independent oversight, transparency, notice, and redress. The policy imposes few substantive safeguards on a wide range of AI-driven activities, by and large allowing agencies to decide for themselves how to mitigate the risks posed by national security systems that have immense consequences for people’s lives and rights. As we have repeatedly seen before, this is a recipe for dangerous technologies to proliferate in secret. “Despite acknowledging the considerable risks of AI, this policy does not go nearly far enough to protect us from dangerous and unaccountable AI systems. National security agencies must not be left to police themselves as they increasingly subject people in the United States to powerful new technologies,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of ACLU’s National Security Project. “If developing national security AI systems is an urgent priority for the country, then adopting critical rights and privacy safeguards is just as urgent. Without transparency, independent oversight, and built-in mechanisms for individuals to obtain accountability when AI systems err or fail, the policy’s safeguards are inadequate and place our civil rights and civil liberties at risk.” For years, the American Civil Liberties Union has been urging far stronger safeguards and transparency about the AI tools that national security agencies are deploying, the rules constraining their use, and the dangers these systems pose to fairness, privacy, and due process. -
Press ReleaseOct 2024
Racial Justice
ACLU Comment on the Department of Labor’s AI Guidelines for Employers and VendorsACLU Comment on the Department of Labor’s AI Guidelines for Employers and Vendors
WASHINGTON — Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) released a roadmap for artificial intelligence (AI) best practices, designed to ensure that emerging technologies such as AI enhance job quality, benefit workers, and comply with existing employment laws when they are used in the workplace. The best practices, pursuant to President Biden’s executive order on the development and use of AI, include recommendations for AI system developers and employers that prioritize workers’ experiences and empowerment throughout the entire AI lifecycle – from design to use and oversight. These practices also call on employers and developers to create standards and processes to identify and mitigate risks from AI systems, such as threats to health and safety, civil rights, privacy, fair labor rights, and labor organizing prior to a developer marketing them or an employer deploying them, and recommend turning to different systems when sufficient mitigation is not possible. “We applaud DOL for issuing best practices for use of AI that center workers’ empowerment, civil rights, privacy, and safety protections and call on developers and employers to adopt critical guardrails in developing, procuring and using AI systems. Employers and developers should take note, as many have been burying their heads in the sand on their risk of legal liability with respect to AI tools,” said Olga Akselrod, senior staff attorney of the ACLU Racial Justice Program. “Following these best practices for AI can help employers and developers ensure that they do not violate existing civil rights and other employment laws that protect workers.” The best practices also recommend transparency measures through conducting and publishing impact assessments, notice and recourse for impacted workers, and measures to minimize worker displacement. The DOL also stated that employers should minimize electronic monitoring and avoid unnecessary collection or retention of worker data.