Illinois Makes Housing Discrimination Based on Immigration Status a Civil Rights Violation

Immigrants have long faced disadvantages in finding adequate housing, from discrimination to lack of access to affordable options.

Earlier this year, the state extended the scope of its Human Rights Act to include immigration status. The law protects people from discrimination in “housing, employment, places of public accommodation, financial credit and education.”

The law prohibits housing providers from discriminating against a person based on actual or perceived “immigration status” during a real estate transaction, including when renting an apartment, buying a home, applying for a mortgage, or receiving housing-related services. Diana Mendoza Pacheco, a real estate attorney based in Naperville, Illinois, has focused her work around the intersection of immigration and real estate.

“There are not a lot of Spanish-speaking attorneys who can explain everything to our community and then individually explain to them how certain immigration consequences can affect their real estate transactions,” she said.

Mendoza Pacheco breaks down the expansion of the Illinois Human Rights Act and what it means for immigrants.

Responses have been edited for length and clarity.

What is the significance of expanding human rights protections in Illinois real estate? 

This is a broader act that already existed but was modified to include immigration status within its protected class. I think one very important key here is that it’s actual or perceived. If you are not a US citizen but someone or an entity, such as a lending institution, landlord, or real estate transaction and seller of real estate, believes you to be of some status and discriminates against you, then this act would afford protections for you, even though you are not an immigrant.

What was it like before this law took effect? 

The Illinois Human Rights Act, which was already codified, protected individuals involved in real estate transactions, whether it was the purchase, the leasing, or the financing of these real estate transactions. Protected classes include race, age, marital status and sexual orientation. The code previously did not include immigration status. These specific classes have now been broadened to include immigration status.

What is considered “immigration status”? Who exactly does this new law protect? Both citizens and noncitizens?

I think there’s an excellent distinction because some people may perceive our community members to be either undocumented, not visa holders, or noncitizens when they may very well be citizens, and they will act according to those perceptions in a discriminatory fashion, so it protects them as well.

For example, if a housing provider who disagrees with asylum policy discriminates against you because they believe you’re here on asylum — even if you’re not an asylee — you’re included in the protections. Those protections are extended because they perceived you to be part of that class and acted in a discriminatory manner.

What are a couple of examples of violations? Is asking for immigration status as a housing provider one of them?

If a lender refuses to provide financing to someone because they are not a citizen or resident, there could be an argument. For instance, if a person has legal status in the US, such as a visa or parole in place, and can prove their ability to be here and work, then refusing to provide a loan could be discriminatory. If the person can demonstrate this, perhaps with an employment authorization card, and the bank still refuses to offer a loan product that would otherwise be available, this could be seen as discrimination.

Similarly, if a real estate agent refuses to take on clients from a particular national origin, such as Venezuelans, because they suspect they are asylum seekers and do not agree with the politics, this could also be discriminatory. National origin is already a protected class, but if the refusal is based on immigration status, it could provide grounds for a cause of action.

Here’s the problem: it’s great if you have an overt case of discrimination that you can clearly point to, but in practice, discriminatory actions are not always so obvious. How do you prove that someone’s intention is truly based on immigration status and nothing else? While it’s possible — with some flagrant and obvious situations — it’s more challenging in cases involving lenders, agents, or sellers who refuse to work with someone. You would need to demonstrate a pattern of behavior by showing how they have treated others differently. This requires evidence that they have systematically acted differently towards others in similar situations.

How does this new law apply to existing tenants?

Yes. For example, if a landlord accepts your application but then rejects you upon discovering you’re here under asylum, they might have a preconceived notion that you won’t be able to pay rent or won’t be a good tenant. If they decide not to renew your lease or refuse to lease to you in the first place because of your immigration status, you could potentially have a cause of action. If their refusal to lease or renew your lease is based on your immigration status, then you are part of a protected class.

What are examples of violations of this law and the consequences for such violations?

When you file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, they will investigate the incident. The person accused of discrimination has to deal with this statutory body, and most people will want to retain an attorney. This adds to the cost of defending against the allegations with the department. If the person accused of discrimination clears their name with the department, that might be the end of it. However, if they find evidence of discrimination, the case could proceed to civil litigation unless both parties agree to settle.

The cost of defending against such claims can deter people from acting in a discriminatory manner. They would have to deal with the state investigation and, if that doesn’t resolve in their favor, hire their own attorney for the private side of the case. If it escalates, the penalties and fines can be significant, and the costs can linger for a long period. These investigations are not quick and can be very expensive to defend against, so individuals involved in real estate transactions would likely do everything they can to avoid any actions that could be considered discriminatory. They also face consequential and punitive damages as allowed by the Act, which can be very costly.

If someone in Illinois thinks they might have been discriminated against in a real estate transaction due to actual or perceived immigration status, what should they do?

There is a mechanism in place with the Illinois Department of Human Rights to investigate these matters, so that would likely be your starting point. (People can also file a charge online.)

Many nonprofit organizations help people take on these cases on a pro bono or low-cost basis. However, due to their nonprofit status and heavy workload, you might not get immediate attention because of staffing shortages and an increase in cases. Nonetheless, various nonprofits do offer free legal services that people can take advantage of.

Why is this law important?

In my opinion, this is nice to have, at least on paper, as it demonstrates that Illinois values the ability of all people, regardless of immigration status, to live, buy, and enjoy property equally. It shows that we take these values seriously as a state. However, the ease or difficulty of implementing this policy is entirely different. How effectively this law can be applied in individual cases remains to be seen. Nevertheless, as a method, it sends a strong message about Illinois’ stance on the issue of housing discrimination.

This content was made possible by a grant from The Chicago Community Trust.