It’s been an especially difficult moment for Dianne Karon, who is 65 years old, transgender
woman as the vitriol from the political spectrum directed at trans and queer individuals has
But, Karon says she still is grateful for having secured safe housing after securing a place at
Stonewall House, a Brooklyn LGBT-friendly senior living facility that was inaugurated in the year.
As with many trans and queer individuals, she’s struggled in search of permanent
accommodation and her time in prison definitely did not ease the process.
“I would be living on the streets if it wasn’t for [Stonewall House],” Karon declared. “It is the best,
and I don’t have to hide.”
LGBTQ people have had problems finding and having a stable home. Research has shown that
housing providers favor homosexual partners over those with similar genders, and offer
transgender applicants fewer choices than those who are cis, who disclose their gender identity.
The search for housing is difficult for the 3 million LGBTQ people who are over 50 who grew up
in a time when the idea of revealing one’s gender identity was not as popular. Also, LGBTQ
individuals have received little recourse to remedy discrimination in housing due to disability or
race is prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, an important civil rights law that was passed 54 years ago as well as gender identity and sexual orientation identities weren’t legally protected up to
This is a significant change that will affect people in the LGBTQ community, but experts warn
that there’s still much to be done before these rights are embraced by the people they’re
designed to safeguard. In order to achieve that, you’ll need to create confidence within LGBTQ
people to know that the concerns of their community will be considered seriously and ensure
ongoing and active training and enforcement for the gatekeepers in the market for housing. The
track record of the government on these issues is from perfect.
Implementation is crucial because policy changes alone won’t change the way people behave.
The Karon’s Stonewall House, named for the 1969 Stonewall protests frequently cited as the
turning point in the contemporary LGBTQ movement, isn’t enough. Although it’s one of few
queer-friendly housing complexes that are federally subsidized across the nation, However,
experts acknowledge that there are never enough housing units to meet the demand as well as
there aren’t all LGBTQ people would like to reside in these communities.
In the long run, fixing America’s housing crisis will give owners and landlords less power to
discriminate. However, for now, the federal government has the power to be able to vigorously
apply anti-discrimination laws in order to make sure that everyone including LGBTQ Americans,
can have secure, affordable homes.
The Supreme Court has finally taken steps to defend LGBTQ Americans
against some forms of discrimination
Despite the flurry of rhetorical and political criticisms of LGBTQ individuals over the last decade,
civil rights advocates claim that there have never been more legal instruments available to us in
the US to combat LGBTQ discrimination in housing. This can be traced all the way back to
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch only 2 years back.
In June of 2020, Gorsuch was among the Court’s most conservative judges and wrote the
majority opinion in Bostock in Bostock v. Clayton County, holding that it was a fair interpretation
of “sex” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — which bans employment discrimination
based on “an employee’s race, color, sex, religion or national origin”-includes those who are
transgender or gay as well.
The consequences of The implications of this decision were immense. The day he took the
office president Joe Biden issued an executive order that instructed all federal agencies and
agencies to review and make sure that their rules, regulations, policies, and guidelines
conformed to Bostock. Bostock Decision.
It was the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was the first government
agency to take action on the situation. On Tuesday, February 11th in 2021 HUD issued an email
that was written by Jeanine Worden, who was the deputy assistant secretary of fair housing and
equality. In it, she stated the fair housing act’s discrimination based on gender provision was similar to the provisions of Title VII. As a result, HUD concluded, LGBTQ persons would now
have access to the same protections for housing under federal law as all other citizens under
the law. HUD will be “open and ready to assist persons who believe they have experienced
discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity,” Worden said.
Before Bostock, the protection of housing rights for LGBTQ individuals was insufficient and for
the vast majority of US states, completely not present. In 2016, 22 states were able to prohibit
discrimination in housing in the context of sexual orientation and 19 states prohibited
discrimination in housing in the context of gender identity. Although HUD issued a regulation in
2012 that ensures everyone has access to its shelters, programs, or facilities LGBTQ people
could get very little relief in courts over discrimination in housing within the regular renting and
The legal hurdles were illustrated precisely in the year 2016 in the case of Mary Walsh and Bev
Nance who was married to a lesbian couple in Missouri and Missouri and were refused the
opportunity to live in a senior-living home based on the fact that they were homosexual. The
couple was together for over four decades and were able to apply for housing at Friendship
Village, a retirement home. The couple had lengthy conversations with the employees of the
facility as well as numerous visits to check out the facilities and even made a deposit of $2,000.
However, just a few days prior to signing their final contract they received a manager’s call
asking for more information about their relationship. After this discussion, Walsh and Nance
were informed Friendship Village would only accept couples who adhered to their “Biblical
definition” of marriage in which marriage is defined as a relationship between male and female.
Walsh Nance and Walsh Nance filed an action that claimed discrimination in housing however,
in the year 2019a district court, a judge denied their case, saying that couples of the same
gender were not protected by the Fair Housing Act.
It was Bostock. Michael Allen, a civil rights attorney who aided in the litigation of Walsh and
Nance’s cases, stated that following the Supreme Court’s decision in 2020 the lawyers of
Friendship Village called and asked to consider the possibility of settling. Walsh and Nance
were in agreement, and although the terms of the settlement are not public, Friendship Village
now makes explicit in its manual that discrimination due to sexual orientation or gender identity
The progress has been made from Bostock However, not enough
In the past year, Allen informed me there’s occurred “no confusion at all” on the part of the
courts regarding applying for Bostockto equitable housing. He also states that the civil rights
attorneys can be said to be “in very good shape” to make more decisions to come that will
strengthen Bostock’s case for applying the reasoning for future housing disputes.
However, while the courts are aware of their obligations under the law, it is the responsibility of
enforcement that is usually on the person. You have to know your rights as a homeowner to
seek compensation and need the ability to act.
HUD has a tool to help ease that burden: People can make formal grievances with HUD without
cost, and the federal officials in charge of housing will look into the complaints. Also, individuals
are able to begin the process without spending a lot of attorney fees upfront.
In the event that an administrative law judge is assigned an appeal, the plaintiff is able to get an
attorney, but they aren’t required to. Attorneys are also encouraged to represent people who
have strong evidence of discrimination in housing in the event that plaintiffs prevail in court, the
defense has to pay for their lawyer’s legal costs.
HUD is, in turn, taking steps to actively solicit complaints from LGBTQ homeowners and
tenants. When they announced the Worden memo in 2017, HUD officials said they received 197
complaints about discrimination in housing based on gender identity or sexual orientation in the
year 2020. A HUD spokesperson confirmed to Vox the agency received 232 complaints by 2021. This is a distance from the numbers of race-related (2,514) or disability-related (4,855)
complaints that were filed in the year. It could take a while for experts to ensure that the majority
of LGBTQ Americans really learn about the changes made by HUD and believe in HUD to take
their concerns seriously.
There is more that must be completed. The year 2021 is when Amy Hillier, a University of
Pennsylvania social policy professor, and Devin Michelle Bunten who is an urban housing and
economics faculty member at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, released an analysis
on ways to introduce more diverse and intersectional methods to fair housing. In particular, in
relation to issues with the Fair Housing Act itself, they claim they believe that there’s an
opportunity to alter the law to safeguard LGBTQ people. The law does protect people from
discrimination based on “family status,” this is not currently the case for the families that are
chosen that comprise the majority of trans and queer people. “The legality of private
discrimination against most household structures mirrors the skepticism of nonnormative
housing long espoused by public policy,” they write.
For clarity, enacting new federal protections won’t address the wider issue of low-cost housing.
Implementing these new laws without a smidgen of fidelity will not be enough to end LGBTQ
discrimination. Housing discrimination based on race is unlawful since 1968, in the Fair Housing
Act. The violence against Asians has for a long time been banned under both criminal and civil
laws. Both continue to be, unfortunately, a part of society.
“The Fair Housing Act is just a tool, but without it, at least in the housing realm, people could
discriminate against LGBTQ individuals with impunity,” Allen added. Allen. “This will correct