Fair Housing Protected Classes by State 2026: Federal Law + All 50 State Additions — Complete Landlord Compliance Guide

The Seven Federal Protected Classes

The Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§3601–3619) was signed into law on April 11, 1968 — one week after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. — by President Lyndon B. Johnson. Congress has amended the Act twice since enactment, most significantly with the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, which added disability and familial status as protected classes.

As of 2026, 42 U.S.C. §3604 prohibits the following in the sale or rental of residential housing:

Refusing to sell or rent, or otherwise making unavailable, housing because of a protected class
Setting different terms, conditions, or privileges of rental because of a protected class
Making false representations about the availability of housing because of a protected class
Advertising with any limitation, preference, or indication of a preference based on a protected class

The seven federal protected classes:

1. Race

The broadest and most absolute protection. Race-based housing discrimination is prohibited by both the FHA and separately by 42 U.S.C. §1982 (the Civil Rights Act of 1866), which has no exemptions, no statute of limitations, and provides a private right of action. The Mrs. Murphy exemption does not apply to race.

2. Color

Discrimination based on skin tone or complexion, including within the same racial or ethnic group. A landlord who accepts one applicant from Country X but rejects another because of darker skin color may violate the color prohibition even if both applicants share the same national origin.

3. National Origin

Covers discrimination based on country of birth, ancestry, ethnicity, surname, accent, or perceived national origin — regardless of citizenship or immigration status. HUD has found that “English-only” lease requirements, accent-based application denials, and assumptions about applicant character based on national origin all implicate this class. The Mrs. Murphy exemption does not apply to national origin.

4. Religion

Covers discrimination based on religious belief, practice, observance, or lack of religious affiliation. Landlords cannot refuse to rent to tenants who display religious symbols, hold prayer gatherings, or who follow religious practices that require regular guests or observable daily routines. Reasonable accommodations for religious observance may be required.

5. Sex (Including Sexual Harassment, and Per HUD 2021: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity)

Originally enacted to cover biological sex / gender. The FHA explicitly prohibits sexual harassment in housing — both quid pro quo harassment (conditioning lease terms on sexual favors) and hostile environment harassment (severe or pervasive unwanted sexual conduct). HUD regulations at 24 C.F.R. §100.600 specifically address sexual harassment. The Bostock extension is addressed in Section 3 below.

6. Disability

Added by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Covers: (a) having a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity; (b) having a record of such impairment; or (c) being regarded as having such impairment. Landlords must provide reasonable accommodations (rule and policy changes — e.g., allowing an ESA despite a no-pets policy, reserving an accessible parking space, waiving a guest policy for live-in aide) and permit reasonable modifications (structural changes to the unit — e.g., grab bars, ramp, lowered cabinets — at the tenant’s expense in private housing). Landlords cannot require a higher security deposit due to disability or ask intrusive medical questions.

7. Familial Status

Added by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Protects: households with children under age 18; a pregnant person; and the designee of a person having custody of a minor. Landlords cannot advertise “no children,” impose occupancy limits more restrictive than HUD’s Keating Memo standard (2 persons per bedroom + 1 as a general benchmark), or impose conditions specifically targeting families with children. Exception — Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA, 42 U.S.C. §3607(b)): qualifying 55-and-older communities (80% of units occupied by at least one person age 55+, published age-verification policies) and 62-and-older communities are exempt from familial status.

The Mrs. Murphy Exemption — What It Actually Covers

42 U.S.C. §3603(b)(2) exempts from the FHA any owner who resides in a single-family home or in one unit of a building containing four or fewer units, provided the owner (a) resides in the building as a principal residence, (b) does not use a real estate broker, and (c) does not use discriminatory advertising.

What the exemption does not cover:

Situation	Exempt?	Why
Race discrimination by owner-occupant of 4-plex	NOT EXEMPT	42 U.S.C. §1982 applies regardless; no exemption for race
Color discrimination by owner-occupant	NOT EXEMPT	Same: §1982 covers color
National origin discrimination by owner-occupant	NOT EXEMPT	§1982 covers national origin
Discriminatory advertising by owner-occupant	NOT EXEMPT	42 U.S.C. §3604(c) prohibits discriminatory advertising with no exemption
Use of real estate broker by owner-occupant	NOT EXEMPT	Once a broker is involved, the exemption is lost
Owner-occupant with 5-unit building	NOT EXEMPT	Exemption limited to 4-unit or smaller
Religion discrimination by CA owner-occupant in 4-plex	NOT EXEMPT	California FEHA has no Mrs. Murphy exemption
Sex discrimination by NJ owner-occupant in 3-unit building	NOT EXEMPT	NJ LAD uses 2-unit line (not 4-unit)
Any discrimination by DC landlord	NOT EXEMPT	DC DCHRA has no owner-occupancy exemption

State law trumps federal exemptions: California, DC, New Jersey (2-unit line), and Massachusetts (limited) have eliminated or narrowed the exemption. Before relying on the Mrs. Murphy exemption, verify both federal applicability AND your state’s own rules.

HUD’s Bostock Interpretation: LGBTQ+ Under “Sex”

In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), the Supreme Court held (6-3, written by Justice Gorsuch) that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity because an employer who discriminates on those grounds necessarily discriminates “because of sex.” The reasoning: if an employer fires a male employee for being attracted to men, but would not fire a female employee for the same attraction, the employer is treating the male employee differently because he is male — sex discrimination by definition.

On February 11, 2021, HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge issued a memorandum directing all HUD FHEO offices to accept and investigate Fair Housing Act complaints alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity under the FHA’s “sex” protected class, applying the Bostock reasoning.

The practical result for landlords in 2026:

HUD will accept and investigate complaints from LGBTQ+ individuals alleging housing discrimination
HUD will charge respondent landlords and pursue civil penalties and remedies under the FHA
In jurisdictions where federal courts have also extended Bostock to housing, private suits in federal court are also available
In the 27+ states that have separately added sexual orientation and/or gender identity to state housing law, the federal question is academic — state law provides independent protection

States where the Bostock/HUD interpretation is the only fair housing protection for sexual orientation and gender identity (no state-level explicit protection as of 2026): Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania (statewide), South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wyoming.

Disparate Impact Theory for Landlords

The Supreme Court confirmed disparate impact liability under the FHA in Texas Dep’t of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, 576 U.S. 519 (2015). A facially neutral landlord policy can violate the FHA without any discriminatory intent if the policy has a statistically significant adverse effect on members of a protected class.

HUD’s implementing regulation (24 C.F.R. §100.500) establishes a three-step burden-shifting framework:

Plaintiff burden: Prove the practice causes a statistically significant disparate impact on a protected class relative to the relevant comparison population.
Defendant/landlord burden: Demonstrate the practice is necessary to achieve a substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest, and that no less discriminatory alternative would achieve the same result.
Plaintiff rebuttal: Show a less discriminatory alternative exists that would achieve the same interest.

Common landlord policies that have faced disparate impact scrutiny:

Blanket criminal conviction bans — per HUD April 2016 guidance, may disparately impact Black and Hispanic applicants. Use individualized assessment: offense type, time elapsed, evidence of rehabilitation. Exclude arrests without conviction entirely.
Income requirements above 3× — requirements of 4× or 5× monthly rent may disparately impact protected classes. 3× is the broadly-accepted safe harbor.
Restrictive occupancy limits — per-unit limits stricter than 2 persons per bedroom may disparately impact families with children (familial status).
English-only application requirements — potential disparate impact based on national origin.
Credit score minimums above 650 — increasingly scrutinized for racial disparate impact in some jurisdictions.

50-State + DC Protected Classes Table

The table below shows the primary additions each state and DC make beyond the seven federal protected classes. All states provide at minimum the seven federal classes via HUD enforcement. “SOI” = source of income (includes HCV/Section 8, SSI, TANF, and other lawful public assistance).

State	Primary State Statute	Sexual Orientation	Gender Identity	Marital Status	Age	Source of Income	Ancestry	Military/Vet	Other Notable Additions
Alabama	Ala. Code §24-8-1 (mirrors federal)	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only
Alaska	AS §18.80.200	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Changes in marital status, pregnancy, parenthood
Arizona	ARS §41-1491	No	No	No	Yes (40+)	No	No	No	Age (40+)
Arkansas	Ark. Code §16-123-201	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only
California	Gov. Code §12955 (FEHA)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (40+)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Gender expression, medical condition, genetic info, immigration status, primary language, citizenship; NO Mrs. Murphy exemption; 20+ total classes
Colorado	CRS §24-34-502	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (40-70)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Gender expression, creed, civil union; $100K max penalty (SOI) = highest US
Connecticut	CGS §46a-64c	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (since 1991)	Yes	No	Early SOI adopter; gender expression
Delaware	6 Del. C. §4601	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (40+)	Yes	No	No	Domestic violence victim status
DC	DC Code §2-1402.21 (DCHRA)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (since 1977 — FIRST)	Yes	No	Personal appearance, family responsibilities, educational enrollment, political affiliation, place of residence/business, creed, homelessness; NO Mrs. Murphy exemption; most expansive jurisdiction in US
Florida	Fla. Stat. §760	No*	No*	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	*Local ordinances (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Orlando, Tampa) add LGBTQ+; state law does not
Georgia	O.C.G.A. §8-3-200	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only; consistent with Georgia’s minimal tenant protection framework
Hawaii	HRS §515	No	No	Yes	Yes (40+)	Yes	Yes	No	HIV/AIDS status; Hawaiian ancestry protections under additional provisions
Idaho	Idaho Code §67-5909	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Minimal additions beyond federal
Illinois	775 ILCS 5/3-101 (IHRA)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (40-70)	Yes (5+ units, 2022)	Yes	Yes	Order of protection status; Chicago FHO adds more (all buildings); $50K max penalty
Indiana	IC §22-9-1	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Minimal additions; ancestry; consistent with Indiana’s Dillon’s Rule minimal-tenant-protection framework
Iowa	Iowa Code Ch. 216	Yes (2007)	Yes (2007 — EARLY)	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Iowa added gender identity in 2007 — among first states to do so; earlier than most coastal states
Kansas	K.S.A. §44-1001	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Ancestry; otherwise minimal additions
Kentucky	KRS §344	No	No	No	Yes (40+)	No	No	Yes (disabled vet)	Age (40+); disabled veteran status
Louisiana	RS §51:2601	No	No	No	Yes (40+)	No	No	No	Age (40+); Louisiana civil law tradition; otherwise limited additions
Maine	5 M.R.S.A. §4551	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Comprehensive framework; MHRC enforces
Maryland	Md. Code Real Prop. §8-211	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes (local only: Montgomery, P.G. Co., Balt. City)	No	No	Montgomery Co. adds: SOI, personal appearance, political opinion, family responsibility; MCCR enforces state law
Massachusetts	G.L. c. 151B	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (pub. assistance, 2021)	Yes	Yes	Children (parallel but separate from familial status), creed, genetic info; MCAD 300-day; $50K civil penalty
Michigan	MCL §37.2501	No	No	Yes	Yes (18+)	No	No	No	HEIGHT and WEIGHT — uniquely prohibits housing discrimination based on height and weight; very unusual nationally; MDCR enforces
Minnesota	Minn. Stat. §363A	Yes	Yes (2023)	Yes	Yes (18+)	Yes (pub. assistance status)	Yes	No	MDHR 1-year; $25K per violation; gender identity explicitly added 2023
Mississippi	Miss. Code §43-141-1	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only
Missouri	RSMo §213	No	No	No	Yes (40-70)	No	Yes	No	Age (40-70), ancestry; no LGBTQ+ state protection
Montana	MCA §49-2-305	No	No	Yes	Yes (18+)	No	No	No	Marital status, age, creed; MHRB enforces
Nebraska	Neb. Rev. Stat. §20-301	No	No	Yes	Yes (40+)	No	No	No	Marital status, age (40+); NEOC enforces
Nevada	NRS §118	Yes (2019)	Yes (2019)	No	No	No	Yes	No	LGBTQ+ added 2019; ancestry; NERC enforces
New Hampshire	RSA §354-A	Yes	Yes (1997 — EARLY)	Yes	Yes (18+)	No	No	No	NH added gender identity in 1997 — one of earliest in US; NH HRC enforces
New Jersey	N.J.S.A. §10:5 (NJ LAD)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Domestic partnership/civil union, genetic info, HIV/AIDS, atypical hereditary traits; Mrs. Murphy = 2-unit (not 4); 6-year civil SOL = longest US; $10K–$50K civil penalty
New Mexico	NMSA §28-1	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Spousal affiliation, domestic abuse victim; NM HRB enforces
New York State	Exec. Law §290 (NYHRL)	Yes	Yes (2019 GENDA)	Yes	Yes	Yes (2020)	No	Yes	Domestic violence victim, predisposing genetic characteristics, lawful occupation; DHR 1-year
New York City	Admin. Code §8-107 (NYCHRL)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	ADDITIONALLY: immigration status, alienage, citizenship, partnership status, caregiver status, credit history, sealed arrest record, homelessness; mixed-motive standard; HRC 3-year; up to $250K civil penalty; 30+ total classes
North Carolina	G.S. §41A	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes + disability (parallel); consistent with G.S. §42-14.1 rent control preemption; minimal additions
North Dakota	N.D.C.C. §14-02.4	No	No	Yes	Yes (40+)	No	No	No	Marital status, age (40+); ND Dept. Labor and Human Rights
Ohio	ORC §4112	No*	No*	No	No	No*	Yes	Yes (NG)	*Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati have local LGBTQ+ and SOI ordinances; National Guard status; OCRC enforces statewide law
Oklahoma	25 O.S. §1451	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only; Oklahoma Human Rights Commission
Oregon	ORS §659A.421	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes (since 2014)	No	Yes	Domestic partnership, domestic violence victim; BOLI $10K per violation; 1-year complaint
Pennsylvania	43 P.S. §955 (PHRA)	No*	No*	No	Yes (40-70)	No*	Yes	No	*Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance adds LGBTQ+ and SOI; Pittsburgh similar; PHRC statewide; age (40-70); ancestry
Rhode Island	R.I. Gen. Laws §34-37	Yes (1995)	Yes	Yes	Yes (18+)	Yes	No	No	Domestic violence victim, homelessness; RICHR enforces
South Carolina	S.C. Code §31-21	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only; SC Human Affairs Commission
South Dakota	SDCL §20-13	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Minimal additions; SD Division of Human Rights
Tennessee	T.C.A. §4-21-601	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only; Tennessee Human Rights Commission
Texas	Tex. Prop. Code Ch. 301	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Ancestry; pre-1993 local ordinances may survive (Tex. LGC §250.007 bars post-1993 local civil rights laws); Texas Workforce Commission enforces
Utah	Utah Code §57-21	No	No	No	No	Yes (HCV, 2019)	No	No	Unusual: Utah added HCV/source of income protection in 2019 without adding LGBTQ+ classes; UALD enforces
Vermont	9 V.S.A. §4503	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes (18+)	Yes (2017)	No	No	VT HRC enforces; comprehensive modern framework
Virginia	Va. Code §36-96.1	Yes (2020)	Yes (2020)	Yes	Yes (18+)	Yes (2020)	No	Yes	Three protections added simultaneously in 2020 (LGBTQ+, SOI, age, marital); Virginia Fair Housing Board + VHRC
Washington	RCW 49.60	Yes (1993)	Yes (2009)	Yes	No	Yes (2018)	Yes	Yes (honorably discharged)	Creed; no Mrs. Murphy for owner-occupied 2-unit buildings; WSHRC $10K per violation; Seattle first-in-time rule adds obligations
West Virginia	WV Code §5-11-9	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Ancestry, HIV/AIDS; WV HRC enforces; otherwise limited additions
Wisconsin	Wis. Stat. §106.50	Yes	No*	Yes	Yes (18+)	Yes (since 1989 — EARLY)	Yes	No	*2021 AG guidance extends 'sex' to gender identity; SOI added 1989 = one of earliest; WI ERD enforces; $10K civil penalty
Wyoming	Wyo. Stat. §27-9-105	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Federal classes only; Wyoming Dept. of Workforce Services

California — Most Expansive State Framework

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Gov. Code §12955 et seq.) provides what is broadly considered the most expansive fair housing framework of any U.S. state. The Civil Rights Department (CRD, formerly the Department of Fair Employment and Housing / DFEH) enforces it.

Protected classes under FEHA for housing: race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, familial status (all federal) PLUS: ancestry, age (40+), marital status, medical condition (genetic-related characteristics), genetic information, sexual orientation, gender (broader than federal “sex”), gender identity, gender expression, source of income (including Section 8 HCV, per SB 329, Gov. Code §12955(k), eff. Jan. 1, 2020), immigration status, primary language, citizenship status, military/veteran status.

No Mrs. Murphy exemption: FEHA applies regardless of whether the owner occupies the building. This is a critical difference from federal law — a California owner who rents out one unit in their owner-occupied duplex is subject to FEHA in full for all protected classes.

Source of income specifics: SB 329 (eff. Jan. 1, 2020) prohibits refusal to rent based on a lawful source of income, defined to include federal, state, and local housing assistance including Section 8 HCV. Narrow exception: owner-occupied buildings with ≤1 non-family rental unit are exempt from the source of income prohibition only. No exception for refusing to accept any other class of lawful income. The CRD can award civil penalty of $25,000 per violation for CRD-initiated matters; private civil suits have no statutory cap on actual or punitive damages.

Rent control intersection: For landlords subject to AB 1482 (the statewide rent cap), active habitability violations and pending fair housing complaints can affect the right to serve “no-fault” eviction notices. See tenant screening laws guide for California screening specifics.

New York State and New York City

New York operates on two tiers: (1) state law under the New York Human Rights Law (NYHRL, Executive Law §290 et seq.), enforced by the NYS Division of Human Rights (DHR); and (2) New York City law under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL, Admin. Code §8-107 et seq.), enforced by the NYC Commission on Human Rights (HRC). NYC law is independent and in most respects more protective than state law.

State classes (added beyond federal): age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (GENDA Act, eff. 2019), military status, predisposing genetic characteristics, domestic violence victim status, lawful occupation, source of income (Executive Law §296(5), S.8040-A, signed January 20, 2020 — effective statewide).

NYC additional classes (beyond state): immigration status, alienage, citizenship status, partnership status (same-sex and different-sex), caregiver status (person who provides direct and substantial care to a child or covered relative), credit history (under fair chance in housing), sealed or expunged arrest records, homelessness.

NYCHRL standard — “mixed motive”: The NYCHRL explicitly adopts a more plaintiff-friendly “one of the motivating factors” standard (Admin. Code §8-130) rather than the federal “but-for” or “primary reason” test. If a protected class characteristic was any factor in a landlord’s decision, the discrimination may be established even if other legitimate reasons also existed.

Statute of limitations: NYC HRC has a 3-year complaint period — significantly longer than the 1-year federal and state periods. NYC HRC civil penalty up to $250,000. Private NYCHRL suits carry unlimited compensatory and punitive damages.

HCV under NYC law: NYC Admin. Code §8-107(5) prohibited source of income discrimination (which includes HCV) since the 1980s — predating the statewide New York law by decades. NYC landlords who advertise “no Section 8” face independent violations of both the NYC HRL and the statewide Executive Law. For NYC rent-stabilized units, NYC rent stabilization rules impose additional obligations when a rent-stabilized tenant holds an HCV.

DC — Oldest SOI Protection, No Exemptions

The DC Human Rights Act (DCHRA, DC Code §2-1401 et seq., enacted 1977) is the most expansive municipal fair housing ordinance in the United States and was the first jurisdiction to add source of income as a protected class in any fair housing context — predating every state SOI law by at least 14 years.

Protected classes in DC housing (DC Code §2-1402.21): All seven federal classes PLUS: age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities (obligations to provide regular care or support to a family member), enrollment in a vocational training or educational program, source of income (since 1977), political affiliation, place of residence or business, ancestry, creed (religious belief or lack thereof), homelessness.

No exemptions in DC: The DCHRA has no owner-occupancy exemption. An owner who rents out a single room in their own home to a single lodger is subject to DCHRA in full. This is the most inclusive coverage rule in the US.

Enforcement: DC Office of Human Rights (OHR) — 1-year complaint period. Remedies include actual damages, up to treble (triple) actual damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief. Civil penalty $10,000–$50,000 for repeated violations.

New Jersey — 2-Unit Mrs. Murphy, Longest SOL

New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (NJ LAD, N.J.S.A. §10:5) is one of the nation’s oldest and broadest civil rights statutes (enacted 1945) and applies in full to housing.

Additional protected classes in NJ housing: age, ancestry, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, domestic partnership status, civil union status, liability for military service, atypical hereditary cellular or blood trait, genetic information, AIDS or HIV infection status, and source of income (lawful source, including Section 8 HCV, SSI, TANF, and other public assistance).

Two-unit Mrs. Murphy rule: New Jersey narrows the owner-occupancy exemption to buildings of two or fewer units — not four as under federal law. An owner who occupies one unit in a three-unit building receives NO exemption from any NJ LAD protected class. (Even the two-unit exemption does not apply to race, color, or national origin.)

Statute of limitations: NJ LAD provides the longest statute of limitations for housing discrimination of any US state — a complainant may file a civil action in court within 6 years of the discriminatory act. Administrative complaints with the NJ Division on Civil Rights (DCR) must be filed within 2 years. This creates significant exposure for landlords who may have made discriminatory decisions years earlier.

Civil penalties: First violation $10,000; second violation $25,000; third or subsequent $50,000. Private civil suits may obtain actual + punitive damages + attorney fees with no cap.

Illinois + Chicago

Illinois operates on two tiers: (1) state law under the Illinois Human Rights Act (IHRA, 775 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq.), enforced by the Illinois Department of Human Rights (IDHR); and (2) Chicago’s Fair Housing Ordinance (Municipal Code Ch. 5-8), enforced by the Chicago Commission on Human Relations (CCHR).

State classes (added beyond federal): age (40-70), ancestry, marital status, order of protection status, military status (but NOT “unfavorable military discharge” — the IHRA excludes those with less-than-honorable discharges), sexual orientation, gender identity. Source of income (IHRA §3-102.1, HB 2775, eff. January 1, 2022): applies to buildings with 5 or more units. Landlords with 4 or fewer units are exempt from the state SOI provision (though not from the Chicago FHO).

Chicago Fair Housing Ordinance (applies to ALL buildings in Chicago, including owner-occupied): All IHRA classes PLUS domestic partnership status, gender expression, source of income (applies to all buildings — no 5-unit floor), military discharge status (including unfavorable discharge — this is broader than state law).

Penalties: IDHR state civil penalty up to $50,000. Chicago CCHR can impose $500–$1,000 per day for continuing violations + actual damages + attorney fees.

Massachusetts

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 151B (the Massachusetts Fair Housing Law) is enforced by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD). MCAD has a 300-day complaint period (shorter than many states’ 1-year period — note this carefully).

Classes added beyond federal: age (broadly construed; not limited to 40+), ancestry, creed, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, military service, genetic information. Public assistance (source of income equivalent, G.L. c. 151B §4(10)): added by Chapter 151 of the Acts of 2021 (eff. November 2021) — requires landlords to accept housing vouchers and other lawful public assistance. This makes Massachusetts a source-of-income protection state as of November 2021.

Children: Massachusetts also prohibits discrimination against persons with children as a protected class, which is related to but technically distinct from “familial status.”

Mrs. Murphy in Massachusetts: Massachusetts limits the owner-occupancy exemption to owner-occupied two-family dwellings for certain classes, but the exemption does not apply to all MCAD-enforced classes. Sexual orientation and gender identity protections, for example, apply to all housing.

Washington State

Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD, RCW 49.60) is enforced by the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC). Seattle has an additional Fair Housing Ordinance (Seattle Municipal Code Ch. 14.08) with its own protections and enforcement.

Classes added beyond federal: creed, honorably discharged veteran/military status, sexual orientation (added 1993 — among early adopters), gender identity or expression (added 2009), ancestry, marital status, source of income (RCW §49.60.222, eff. September 30, 2018 — via HB 2578).

No Mrs. Murphy for 2-unit buildings: Washington State law applies to owner-occupied two-unit buildings for most protected classes, unlike the federal 4-unit threshold. If you own a duplex and live in one unit, you must comply with WLAD for the rented unit.

Seattle first-in-time rule: Seattle SMC §14.08.050 requires landlords to offer a tenancy to the first qualified applicant who meets screening criteria — landlords may not cherry-pick among qualified applicants in a way that could lead to discrimination. This adds a procedural compliance obligation on top of the substantive anti-discrimination rules.

Civil penalty: WSHRC civil penalty up to $10,000 per violation plus actual damages.

Notable State-by-State Findings

Iowa: 2007 Gender Identity — Before Most Coastal States

Iowa added both sexual orientation AND gender identity to its housing discrimination law in 2007 (Iowa Code Ch. 216), making it one of the earliest states in the nation to explicitly protect gender identity in housing — before California, before New York, and before most states now considered more progressive on LGBTQ+ rights. Iowa Civil Rights Commission (ICRC) enforces.

Michigan: Height and Weight Discrimination

Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (MCL §37.2501) uniquely prohibits housing discrimination based on height and weight — a protected class found in almost no other US jurisdiction for housing. This applies to refusing to rent, setting different terms, and advertising based on a person’s physical stature or body weight. Michigan landlords who set occupancy standards or unit features based on weight capacity (other than genuine structural safety limits) face liability. The Michigan Department of Civil Rights (MDCR) enforces. Note: Michigan does not add sexual orientation or gender identity at the state level, but several cities including Detroit, Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids, and Kalamazoo have local ordinances covering LGBTQ+ housing protections.

Wisconsin: Source of Income Since 1989

Wisconsin added lawful source of income to its Fair Housing Law (Wis. Stat. §106.50) in 1989 — predating almost all other state-level SOI protections. Wisconsin landlords have been prohibited from refusing to rent based on Section 8 or other public assistance for more than 35 years. The Wisconsin Equal Rights Division (ERD) enforces; civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation.

New Hampshire: Gender Identity Since 1997

New Hampshire added gender identity to its housing discrimination law (RSA §354-A) in 1997 — when this was politically unusual and before the national conversation about transgender rights had meaningfully begun. NH Commission for Human Rights enforces.

Utah: Source of Income Without LGBTQ+ Protection

Utah presents an interesting policy configuration: it added source of income protection (including HCV/Section 8) to its Fair Housing Law (Utah Code §57-21) in 2019 — requiring landlords to accept housing voucher holders — without simultaneously adding sexual orientation or gender identity as protected classes. Utah relies on the federal Bostock/HUD interpretation for LGBTQ+ housing protection. The Utah Antidiscrimination and Labor Division (UALD) enforces.

Maryland: SOI Only in Select Counties

Maryland has state-level fair housing law (Md. Code Real Prop. Art. §8-211) that adds marital status, sexual orientation, and gender identity statewide, but does not add source of income at the state level. SOI protection in Maryland is patchwork — Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, Baltimore City, and Baltimore County have local ordinances. Landlords with properties in those jurisdictions must accept housing vouchers; landlords elsewhere in Maryland are not required to under state law.

Ohio: City-by-City Patchwork

Ohio’s state civil rights law (ORC §4112) adds National Guard military status and ancestry but does not add sexual orientation, gender identity, or source of income statewide. However, Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati have local ordinances adding LGBTQ+ protections and in some cases source of income. Ohio landlords with properties in these cities must comply with city ordinances that exceed the state baseline. Ohio Civil Rights Commission (OCRC) enforces statewide law; city civil rights offices enforce local laws.

Filing a Fair Housing Complaint — Three Paths

A tenant or housing applicant who believes they have been discriminated against has three enforcement avenues, each with different timelines and remedies:

Path 1 — HUD Administrative Complaint

File with HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO). Deadline: one year from the discriminatory act. HUD investigates, makes a Reasonable Cause determination, and either files a Charge of Discrimination (proceeding before an Administrative Law Judge) or refers to the DOJ for federal court action. ALJ remedies: injunction, actual damages, civil penalties ($21,663 first offense; $54,157 second within 5 years; $108,315 third+ within 7 years as of 2023 inflation adjustment), attorney fees. Both parties can elect federal court in lieu of ALJ.

Path 2 — Private Federal Court Action

Complainant files directly in federal district court without going through HUD. Statute of limitations: two years from the last discriminatory act. Relief: injunction, actual damages, punitive damages (no statutory cap in private suits), attorney fees. No civil penalty in private actions.

Path 3 — State or Local Agency

State fair housing agencies typically operate concurrently with HUD under worksharing agreements. State complaint periods vary from 180 days (Florida FCHR) to 300 days (MCAD in Massachusetts) to 1 year (most states) to 2 years (NJ DCR administrative) to 3 years (NYC HRC). State agencies may act faster and may provide remedies exceeding federal minimums.

Landlord response protocol: When served with a HUD or state agency notice, (1) do not ignore it; (2) contact a fair housing attorney within 5 business days; (3) assemble all documentation — application forms, screening checklists, denial letters, advertising materials, communications with the complainant; (4) prepare a written narrative of the screening decision; (5) engage cooperatively with the investigation while protecting privileged communications.

10-Step Landlord Fair Housing Compliance Checklist

Know your jurisdiction’s classes. Identify the state and local fair housing laws that apply to each property. If you own in California, New York City, New Jersey, Illinois, DC, or Massachusetts, use the state/city framework — it adds significant classes and penalties beyond federal law. If you own in a state with minimal additions, the federal framework is your primary guide (with Bostock/HUD’s sexual orientation and gender identity extension).
Verify the Mrs. Murphy exemption applies (or doesn’t). If you own and occupy a building of 4 or fewer units, federal law exempts you from some (not all) FHA prohibitions. But California has no exemption; DC has no exemption; NJ uses a 2-unit line. Race, color, and national origin discrimination are never exempt. Verify your specific situation before relying on the exemption.
Create a written screening policy and apply it identically to all applicants. Your written policy must specify: minimum credit score; income requirement (income test applied to tenant’s share for HCV holders in SOI-protection states); look-back period and offense types for criminal history; references required; other standards. Every application decision must be documentable against this policy. Deviations — granting exceptions to some applicants and not others of different protected classes — are the most common evidence in fair housing enforcement.
Review all advertising. Read every rental listing for language that could imply a preference based on any protected class: “no children,” “perfect for a couple,” “English speakers only,” “no vouchers,” “Christian home,” “no Section 8.” None of these are lawful. Describe the property, not the ideal tenant.
Eliminate criminal conviction bans and replace with individualized assessment. Blanket criminal background policies (any conviction = rejection) create disparate impact liability. Replace with: exclude arrests without conviction; set reasonable look-back periods by offense type (3-7 years); exclude offenses where conviction was sealed/expunged; conduct individualized assessment for serious convictions (nature of crime, time elapsed, rehabilitation evidence).
Establish a formal accommodation process for disability-related requests. When a tenant or applicant requests a reasonable accommodation or modification, engage the interactive process: acknowledge the request in writing within 3-5 business days; request verification of disability and disability-accommodation nexus (a letter from a licensed healthcare provider is sufficient); evaluate whether the request is reasonable (does not impose an undue burden); respond in writing. For ESA requests: do not require registry certificates or internet-issued documentation; a health provider letter is sufficient.
Train all agents, managers, and maintenance staff. Fair housing violations are frequently committed by agents and property managers, not the building owner directly. Landlords can be vicariously liable for discriminatory acts of their employees and agents. Annual fair housing training, with documentation, is both a compliance measure and an effective defense.
Audit source-of-income compliance if in an SOI-protection jurisdiction. If you own property in the 17 SOI states + DC + applicable local jurisdictions: remove any “No Section 8” or “No Vouchers” language from all advertising; apply income test to tenant’s portion only (not full contract rent) when evaluating HCV holders; do not impose extra fees, delays, or conditions on voucher applicants; process HCV applications on the same timeline as non-voucher applications.
Document every screening decision in real time. Write the reason for any denial at the time of the decision, before you know whether the applicant will complain. A denial reason that is documented contemporaneously is far more credible than one reconstructed after a complaint is filed. Maintain all documentation for at least 3 years (longer in NJ, where the civil SOL is 6 years).
Never take adverse action within the fair housing anti-retaliation window. Issuing a notice, raising rent, refusing a renewal, or terminating utilities within 90-180 days of a fair housing complaint (timing varies by state) creates a retaliation presumption. If you must take adverse action for genuine reasons in this window, document pre-existing, documented grounds that existed before the complaint and are unrelated to it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the seven federal protected classes under the Fair Housing Act, and when does each apply to landlords?

The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. §3604) prohibits residential housing discrimination on the basis of seven classes. (1) RACE — most absolute protection; 42 U.S.C. §1982 provides additional coverage with no exemptions and no time limit. (2) COLOR — distinct from race; covers discrimination based on skin tone within the same racial group. (3) NATIONAL ORIGIN — covers country of birth, ethnicity, accent, surname, perceived national origin; HUD has found English-only lease requirements can implicate this class. (4) RELIGION — covers belief, practice, or lack of religious affiliation. (5) SEX — includes sexual harassment; HUD’s 2021 Bostock memorandum extends “sex” to sexual orientation and gender identity. (6) DISABILITY — added 1988; requires reasonable accommodations (rule changes) and reasonable modifications (structural changes at tenant expense); landlords cannot require higher deposits or ask intrusive medical questions. (7) FAMILIAL STATUS — added 1988; households with children under 18, pregnant persons, and legal designees of persons with custody of a minor; no “no children” policies; HOPA exempts qualifying senior housing communities.

Does the Mrs. Murphy exemption protect me as a small landlord renting out my owner-occupied duplex?

The Mrs. Murphy exemption (42 U.S.C. §3603(b)(2)) exempts owner-occupants of buildings of four or fewer units from most FHA prohibitions IF no broker is used AND no discriminatory advertising is used. BUT: the exemption DOES NOT APPLY to race, color, or national origin (42 U.S.C. §1982 has no exemption); DOES NOT APPLY if a broker is used; DOES NOT APPLY to discriminatory advertising (42 U.S.C. §3604(c) has no exemption for advertising); and is eliminated or narrowed by state law in California (no exemption), DC (no exemption), New Jersey (2-unit line, not 4-unit), Massachusetts (limited), and Washington (2-unit for some classes). Before relying on the exemption, verify both the federal applicability AND your state’s rules.

Does federal fair housing law cover sexual orientation and gender identity, and what does the Bostock decision mean for landlords?

The FHA’s text does not explicitly list sexual orientation or gender identity. But in Bostock v. Clayton County (590 U.S. 644, 2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s “sex” prohibition covers sexual orientation and gender identity because discriminating on those grounds necessarily involves discriminating “because of sex.” HUD issued a February 2021 memorandum applying this reasoning to the FHA and directing FHEO offices to accept and investigate housing complaints alleging sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination under the “sex” class. As of 2026, treat sexual orientation and gender identity as de facto federally protected in housing. 27+ states have also independently added LGBTQ+ protections to state fair housing law, making the federal question academic in those jurisdictions.

What is disparate impact theory and how does it create fair housing liability for neutral landlord policies?

Disparate impact (confirmed by Texas Dep’t of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project, 576 U.S. 519, 2015) holds that a facially neutral policy violates the FHA if it disproportionately excludes members of a protected class and is not justified by business necessity with no less-discriminatory alternative. Common landlord policies at risk: blanket criminal conviction bans (HUD 2016 guidance identifies disparate impact on Black and Hispanic applicants); income requirements above 3× (potential disparate impact); restrictive occupancy limits (potential familial status disparate impact); English-only application requirements (potential national origin disparate impact). Defense: document the legitimate business justification for each policy, apply it consistently, use the least restrictive version of the policy that achieves your legitimate goal.

Which states add the most fair housing protected classes beyond the federal baseline, and where are landlords most exposed?

The highest-exposure jurisdictions (most classes, strongest enforcement, highest penalties): (1) NYC — 30+ classes, 3-year SOL, $250K civil penalty, plaintiff-friendly mixed-motive standard; (2) California — 20+ classes, no Mrs. Murphy exemption, unlimited damages in private suit; (3) DC — 15+ classes including oldest SOI protection (1977), no owner-occupancy exemption, treble damages; (4) New Jersey — 12+ additional classes, 2-unit Mrs. Murphy, 6-year civil SOL (longest in US), $50K civil penalty; (5) Illinois/Chicago — state law adds 8+ classes, Chicago FHO applies to all buildings including owner-occupied, $50K state penalty. Also high-exposure: Massachusetts (300-day MCAD, $50K penalty), Washington (SOI + no 2-unit Mrs. Murphy exemption, $10K per violation), Colorado ($100K SOI penalty = highest US).

Can a landlord legally ask about a prospective tenant’s medical condition, disability status, or need for accommodation during the application process?

Prohibited: asking whether an applicant has a disability; asking about nature, severity, or diagnosis of any disability; requiring medical exams or records; rejecting an application because the landlord believes the applicant will require excessive accommodation. Permitted: neutral questions about ability to meet lease obligations (same questions for all applicants); requesting verification (disability exists + accommodation is related to disability) when a specific accommodation is requested. Verification may come from any licensed healthcare provider — no registry, certificate, or specific diagnosis is required. For ESA requests: HUD’s January 2020 guidance prohibits requiring internet ESA certifications; a health provider letter confirming disability and ESA-nexus is sufficient; no pet fee or deposit may be charged for an ESA. Engage the interactive process in good faith for all accommodation requests.

What is the process for filing a fair housing complaint, and how does HUD’s enforcement process work for landlords?

Three paths: (1) HUD FHEO administrative complaint — file within 1 year; HUD investigates; Reasonable Cause → ALJ or DOJ court action; civil penalties $21,663 (first) through $108,315 (3rd+); no cap on actual damages in court. (2) Private federal court — 2-year SOL; actual + punitive damages + attorney fees; no civil penalty. (3) State/local agency — timelines from 180 days (FL FCHR) to 3 years (NYC HRC); state penalties may exceed federal. Landlord response: when served with a complaint notice, do not ignore it; contact a fair housing attorney within 5 business days; assemble all documentation (applications, screening records, denial letters, advertising materials, communications); cooperate with investigation while protecting attorney-client privilege.

What are the most common fair housing violations that landlords commit, and how do I avoid them?

Top 10 violations: (1) Discriminatory advertising (“no children,” “no Section 8,” “English speakers only”) — fix: describe property only. (2) Differential treatment in showing units — fix: maintain showing log for all applicants. (3) Blanket criminal conviction bans — fix: individualized assessment policy in writing; exclude arrests without conviction. (4) Steering (describing neighborhoods to guide protected-class members away from certain areas) — fix: describe all units consistently; never reference neighborhood demographics. (5) Inconsistent application of screening criteria — fix: written policy, applied identically. (6) Refusing reasonable accommodation for disability — fix: engage interactive process; respond in writing within 3-5 days. (7) Sexual harassment in housing — fix: harassment policy, training, documented complaint channel. (8) Retaliation for fair housing complaints — fix: never take adverse action within anti-retaliation window without pre-existing documented grounds. (9) Illegal application questions (disability, family plans, religion) — fix: standardized form asking only income, rental history, credit, and background check authorization. (10) Refusing ESA without engaging the interactive process — fix: health provider letter + interactive process; never charge pet fee for ESA.