In a misguided effort to combat racial disparities in housing, the city of Seattle passed the “Fair Chance Housing Ordinance,” which forbids housing providers from considering or even asking about applicants’ criminal histories—information usually uncovered in a standard background check. Pacific Legal Foundation represented several small-scale housing providers whose constitutionally guaranteed choice to ask questions about and decide whom to allow on their private property is violated by the Ordinance.
An artist by trade, Kelly Lyles earns a modest living as a small-scale landlord, renting out a second house she owns in Seattle. Kelly has enjoyed a mutually beneficial and respectful relationship with her tenants. But if they move out, the “Fair Chance Housing Ordinance” limits her choices over who she rents to next. The City Council passed this rule in 2017, forbidding landlords from asking about or relying on applicants’ criminal histories when selecting tenants. This means Kelly cannot base a rental decision on factors like personal safety or concerns about violent offenses or crimes against children.
Represented by PLF free of charge, Kelly and other rental property owners, including Chong and MariLyn Yim, sued the city of Seattle. The district court ruled in the city’s favor on July 6, 2021.
But on appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled partially for the property owners. The court held that preventing housing providers from even asking about potential tenants’ criminal histories violated the First Amendment. Following that partial victory, the rental property owners asked the court to recognize their right to base rental decisions on relevant information about applicants’ criminal histories.
Unfortunately, on August 5, 2025, the court held that asking for this information is “severable” from being legally permitted to act on it. As a result, the Ordinance still prohibits landlords like Kelly from using information about applicants’ criminal histories to exclude dangerous tenants from their property.
What’s At Stake?
- Government cannot forbid local housing providers from choosing their own tenants
