DOJ Bullies Cities to Revoke Crime-Free Housing Laws it says “Unfairly Penalize Communities of Color”
The Biden administration is threatening—and has sued—local governments and law enforcement agencies across the country that have implemented measures to curb an epidemic of crime, drugs and gang violence in rental properties asserting that the policies “unfairly penalize communities of color.” The popular laws, enacted by thousands of cities nationwide are commonly known as “crime-free” and “nuisance” programs that restrict housing based on criminal and arrest records and punish landlords and tenants with excessive calls to police and emergency services or those engaged in criminal activity. To improve living conditions in mainly low-income rentals 2,000 cities across 48 states have adopted crime-free and nuisance policies, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has legally challenged many of the measures in the last few years claiming that they are discriminatory and therefore violate federal law.
“Even when well-intentioned, these programs can disrupt lives, force families into homelessness and result in loss of jobs, schooling and opportunities for people who are disproportionately low-income people of color – all in violation of federal law,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who heads the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. “These programs can also discourage people with disabilities and their loved ones from seeking help during a mental health crisis and prevent victims of domestic violence from seeking the protection they desperately need.” The lifelong civil rights lawyer, who has dedicated her career to “combating discrimination faced by African American and other marginalized communities,” assures that the agency will continue to fight what she calls “discriminatory and unlawful housing programs across the country” while supporting the efforts of local governments and police to prevent violent crime. Clarke delivered the comments a few days ago when the DOJ sternly warned cities with crime-free and nuisance measures that they are violating federal housing protections.
In a lengthy document warning local governments and their law enforcement agencies about policies to curb crime in rental housing, the DOJ writes that it has successfully challenged many of them and forced “a number of municipalities,” to repeal their measures. The feds also remind those still enforcing their crime-free and nuisance policies that “states from California to Iowa have passed legislation prohibiting” them. The agency essentially threatens the local enforcers of crime-free and nuisance initiatives by stating that they are violating four federal laws—the Fair Housing Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Violence Against Women Act. The DOJ graciously offers to work collaboratively with local police and governments to reverse, or at least relax, tough-on-crime policies widely opposed by the left.
In its widely distributed warning, addressed to “Dear Colleague,” the agency lists examples of how it has successfully challenged the laws around the country, apparently an intimidation tactic since it can be daunting—and financially impossible—for local governments to take on the federal government with its vast resources. “Remedies arising from violations of these four statutes include monetary relief (including damages, civil penalties, and attorneys’ fees), potential termination of federal funding, and injunctive relief (including potential repeal of a program and judicial oversight),” the DOJ warning to local governments states, adding that “recent settlements have required law enforcement agencies and local governments to pay millions of dollars in monetary relief and to repeal or rehaul their programs.” The agency offers numerous cases with extensive background information to illustrate how it has flexed its muscle to eliminate tough on crime housing policies nationwide.
Examples include Hesperia, California repealing its policies and paying nearly $1 million in “relief” after the feds sued the southern California desert city with a population of around 100,000. Faribault, Minnesota doled out nearly $700,000 to settle its federal case and is prohibited from enforcing the types of criminal history that may be considered by private landlords when screening tenants. Bedford, Ohio repealed its laws after dishing out a $350,000 monetary award. Hemet, California got rid of its measures and was forced to create a $200,000 remediation fund. Anoka, Minnesota made “substantial program amendments” and paid $175,000 to settle with the DOJ.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/doj-bullies-cities/