Journal of Affordable Housing Article Highlights Department of Justice Study and the National Issue of Sexual Harassment in Housing 

By Julie Walker, NLIHC National Campaign Coordinator  

An article in volume 33 of the Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development, “Housing Sexual Harassment: A Department of Justice Case Study,” provides background on sexual harassment in housing in legal cases and existing research, followed by a Department of Justice analysis of 76 cases filed in courts across the U.S. over several decades and an interpretation of the findings. The study reveals that most alleged perpetrators are the owner-operators of rental properties. The findings indicate a lack of effective oversight and professional management in housing, which contributes to the frequency of harassment. Victims frequently initiated a complaint by contacting law enforcement, but the response was often inadequate. The findings support the need for improvements in regulatory measures and tenant protections to support tenants and prevent harassment.   

Title VIII of the “Civil Rights Act of 1968,” also known as the Fair Housing Act (FHA), prohibits sex discrimination in housing. Although there are no specific prohibitions against sexual harassment in the FHA, in 1986 the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a form of illegal sex discrimination in employment and courts have applied this to the FHA’s prohibition on sex discrimination. Sexual harassment claims can be brought to courts under two theories—quid pro quo and hostile environment. Quid pro quo involves a housing-related benefit that is conditioned on coercion of sexual activity or retaliation if the victim does not comply. If arguing hostile environment, the complainant must prove that conduct was sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to create a hostile or abusive living situation. While existing empirical data on sexual harassment in housing is limited, prior research indicates that most housing sexual harassment cases involve demands or requests for sexual activity in place of rent, which can be argued using either or both theories depending on the facts of the cases.   

Every case alleging sexual harassment in housing filed by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, Housing and Civil Enforcement (HCE) Section was reviewed for the DOJ study. The DOJ has authority to enforce the FHA, specifically with the authority to prosecute fair housing cases in federal court when there is evidence in a defendant’s pattern or practice of discrimination, or if any group of people have been denied fair housing rights and this raises an issue of “general public importance.” Filed cases are posted on the HCE Section website along with additional case-related documents, and as of January 2024 there were 76 housing sexual harassment cases. Complaints and related documents were reviewed with a focus on four factors: identity of the alleged perpetrator and their relationship to the property owner; the type of housing; the conduct alleged; and the circumstances surrounding the complaint and subsequent actions taken. The cases span 30 years, with the earliest filed in 1993 and most recent in 2023.   

Major findings from the case analysis include:  

• 73% of the alleged perpetrators were the owners-operators of housing. 
• The most common form of harassment, found in 93% of cases, was the perpetrator’s offer or attempt to obtain sex in exchange for tenancy, reductions on rent, or repairs.  
• In 66% of cases, the perpetrator allegedly evicted, threatened to evict, or refused to rent to people who refused the offer.  
• The most common way that victims made a complaint was to call law enforcement, which in some cases appeared to have jeopardized their housing stability with some victims being evicted or given notices to vacate after making the complaint.  
• 92% of cases involved private landlords operating rental properties.   

These findings indicate that perpetrators of housing sexual harassment are more likely to be owner-operators of private rental housing who are often operating with little oversight or monitoring of their actions. While professional infrastructure has been developed to address sexual harassment in employment, no similar infrastructure exists in the context of housing. Employers have a strong incentive to develop and implement anti-harassment policies under Title VII of the “Civil Rights Act of 1964,” which prohibits sex-based discrimination in employment, but housing providers do not have the same legal incentives as employers to create similar policies. HUD provides recommendations for owners and property managers to develop and implement policies again sexual harassment, and the author calls for future research on potential policy levers that could further incentivize this.   

The data available on housing sexual harassment also suggests that women with low incomes are most likely to be victims. While some commentators have speculated that sexual harassment in housing is more likely to occur in public housing or the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, existing data suggests that there is no increased likelihood of being victimized while living in subsidized housing compared to the private rental market. However, the DOJ study does reveal that a significant amount of housing sexual harassment is perpetrated by landlords participating in the HCV program or by Housing Authority employees. The author recommends that HUD continue to expand efforts to protect tenants in HUD-assisted housing.   

Read the article here.