Craigslist Fair Housing Act Suit Dismissed 162
tigersaw writes, "A federal judge in Chicago has dismissed the suit against Craigslist brought by the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which accused the site of violating the Fair Housing Act of 1968 by not actively filtering out housing advertisements that include discriminatory language. Craigslist cited their community-based flagging system as an already effective means of limiting such posts. However, the court held that the site was nonetheless protected by the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA), which shields Web forums from liability for ads and opinions posted by their users."
Terms of Use (Score:4, Informative)
non-reg link (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Discriminatory Language (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Discriminatory Language (Score:4, Informative)
They may be safe; (Score:4, Informative)
Now people have the right to have opinions I find horrid, they do have that right. But they do not have the right to discriminate with housing. On paper.
They could show the room to let to several people, choice one that configures with their "beliefs" and call the others with the statement that an earlier viewer decided to rent, and has secured a deposit. Easy. Clean. And hard to sue.
Personally, I am guilty to the treatment above. I "HATE" idiots. Pure stupidity and I do not mix (Idiots, not dyslexics. We cool.). So when I rent a room, I conduct a small interview, both via e-mail and durring a personal tour. If I like the cut of their jib, I rent them the room. If not, I wait until I find one I do like, then rent to the following party.
So, if you hate hippies, the same method works as well. Or any other group.
Re:Terms of Use (Score:2, Informative)
Discriminatory housing posts are legal (As the property owner) if the poster will be sharing the same building/structure of IIRC 4 units or less with the renter.
Additionally -
There is nothing discriminatory about seeking housing (as the renter) 'with' a particular group. Self limitation is never actionable, or restricted.
Posted as AC because there are idiot racists, and other idiots who love to scream racist.
Re:Terms of Use (Score:3, Informative)
How "civil rights" and moneymaking go hand-in-hand in America is unforgivable. This is one of the many reasons I think the tort reform people are thinking in the right direction. And this is coming from a born and bred Chicago liberal. As much as I would like to support Jesse Jackson, after reading about his similiar tactics I just can't. Either there's social justice or there's shady moneymaking. You can't have both and retain integrity. The ACLU understands this.
I've lived in Chicago and have run various small business in Chicago. (thus posting anon) The amount of abuse in the civil court system over civil rights issues, mostly discrimination and sexual harrassment is appauling. There's no shortage of people out to lie to make a quick buck and no shortage of shady lawyers willing to take 40% of that quick buck.
Btw here are some of the ads. You can't say if its near a church or a synagogue or a mexican restaurant. Err, ok.
Re:They may be safe; (Score:4, Informative)
Re:"Please register or log in" (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Terms of Use (Score:3, Informative)
I am a fair housing attorney. Before anyone goes ballistic, I should explain that I only defend fair housing cases. I have been handling this type of case for over 20 years and have never represented a plaintiff. I defend these cases because they are a challenge to win and the consequences of defeat are absolutely horrendous, both financially and emotionally. I have never lost a fair housing case. I am a lawyer, not a magician. I keep my clients from defeat by promptly settling cases they cannot possibly win.
Stating an illegal preference is clearly illegal under the Fair Housing Act. The law does not only condemn racial discrimination. Federal fair housing law protects all but a very short list of persons:
1. Current users of illegal drugs. Property owners can refuse to rent based on that use. 42 U.S.C. 3602(h).
2. Transvestites, who are not considered to be handicapped. Act of Sept. 13, 1988, P.L. 100-430, 6(b)(3), 102 Stat. 1622.
3. Persons who pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others or who would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others. 42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(9).
4. Illegal ("undocumented") aliens. The Fair Housing Act does not prevent discrimination based on citizenship status. Espinoza v. Hillwood Square Mutual Association 522 F.Supp. 559 (E.D. Va. 1981). See "Response to concerns about housing security following September 11, 2001." http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/sept11.cfm / [hud.gov]
Under federal law, discrimination is illegal when it is based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. 3604. In California, it is also illegal to discriminate on the basis of ancestry, marital status, age, sexual orientation, source of income or medical condition. California Government Code 12955(a) and 12926. California Civil Code 51-51.3. California also prohibits "arbitrary" discrimination. Harris v. Capital Growth Investors XIV, 52 Cal. 3d 1142 (1991). (I realize that the craigslist case was brought in Illinois, but I am not licensed to practice law there.)
Since everyone has a gender, everyone is protected from sex-based discrimination. Similarly, everyone is either in a family or not, has a race or color and a national origin, and either has or does not have a religion. "Handicap" or disability is a very broad category. The law also protects people from discrimination because they associate with a person in a protected category or because they are incorrectly perceived to be in a protected category. For practical purposes, just about everyone is covered by the Fair Housing Act.
A landlord cannot advertise that the apartment is near a church or synagogue because this implies an illegal preference based on religion. The Mexican restaurant isn't a big problem, but saying the neighborhood is Hispanic implies that anyone else is not welcome. "Godly, Christian Male" expresses both a religious and a gender preference; but it's fine to require cleanliness. The ad about "2 guys in their mid-twenties who throw parties all the time" is illegal based on a gender preference; but the landlord could ask for people who don't throw parties. The last four ads may sound fine, but they imply that a family with children would not be welcome.
Renting residential property is a business, and property owners and managers are held to a strict standard of compliance with fair housing laws. Amateurs who do not bother to learn the rules are likely to get bitten by them. I have written a number of fair housing articles which are available at http://www.msslc.com/ [msslc.com] I believe that the federal judge who dismissed the craigslist case acted correctly. While the statements made were illegal under the Fair Housing Act, craigslist should not be liable under the CDA. I doubt this decision will be appealed, and if it is I confidently predict it will be upheld.