PRISON FELLOWSHIP'S POSITION
We believe removing barriers to second chances is a tangible expression of God’s message of redemption. Barriers to success based upon a criminal record should always be limited to what is necessary to protect the public.
- Stable housing is critical to the safety of all Americans and essential for the success of people returning from prison.
- Government should offer and incentivize housing access for people with a criminal record, including but not limited to transitional housing, safe and affordable housing, grants, and vouchers or tax credits for private landlords who participate.
- Government subsidized housing should be carefully evaluated for quality assurance and fraud prevention and should intentionally promote success in private housing markets for formerly incarcerated men and women.
- Housing providers who benefit from government tax breaks, subsidies, or other benefits should not categorically exclude people with a criminal record.
- Private landlords should not be required by law to offer housing access to people with a criminal record. However, we applaud landlords who embrace a culture of second chances and who seek to review each potential applicant as an individual, accounting for the time that has passed since the offense and for evidence of rehabilitation.
- Where a criminal record is considered for a renter or mortgage applicant, the determination of whether to grant someone housing or a mortgage should focus primarily on a person’s ability to meet the financial obligation.
- Government actors should carefully consider how liability insurance and zoning practices as applied to people with criminal records can contribute to safe and flourishing communities.
THE SCOPE
Housing is an important factor for health, safety, and opportunity. But for many people with a criminal record, stable and affordable housing is out of reach. Most rental and public housing applications, as well as some mortgage processes, require a background check. An application may be denied based on a prior conviction regardless of time that has passed or evidence of rehabilitation.[1] In some cases, current tenants may be evicted if family members with a criminal history live in the home, even where those family members are youths with a criminal record.[2] Several jurisdictions even consider an arrest, regardless of conviction.[3]
KEY FACTS
- People with a criminal record face a high risk of housing insecurity, mental health issues, relapse, and homelessness.
- Studies have found that people who secure stable housing post-release are less likely to recidivate.[4]
- Another study found that 72% of respondents cited the lack of affordable housing as one of the most significant barriers to securing housing post-release.
At the state and federal level, there are more than 1,300 legal barriers to housing and residency related to a criminal record.[5] These barriers include criminal background checks for rental and mortgage applications, denial of federal fair housing law protections, housing forfeiture, and eviction.[6] Given that people of color are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, these barriers can also disproportionately limit housing options for non-white Americans.[7]
Federal law places several mandatory and discretionary restrictions on people with criminal records who wish to live in government-subsidized housing.[8] For example, if an applicant has engaged in drug-related, violent, or other criminal activity that would impact other residents’ health, safety, or peaceful enjoyment, a housing authority may deny the application for a “reasonable time” period following the offense or conviction.[9] People convicted of criminal sexual misconduct or manufacturing methamphetamine face a mandatory lifetime ban from subsidized housing.[10]
Although federal law provides strict guidance, local policies vary due to the discretion of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These differences raise four key issues: 1) unreasonable look back periods, as a “reasonable time” is defined by the housing authority and sometimes extends indefinitely after a criminal offense; 2) equating arrests with evidence of criminal activity when screening applicants; 3) overbroad categories of criminal activity, such as blanket bans on felony convictions; and 4) underuse of the applicant’s opportunity to present evidence of mitigating circumstances or appeal a denial of their application.[11]
In addition to facing legal barriers, people with a criminal record often encounter financial barriers to safe housing. There is a widespread lack of affordable housing across the U.S., particularly in urban areas.[12] This is particularly acute for people who leave prison without jobs or appreciable income.[13] In a 2020 survey of currently incarcerated people, access to affordable housing and living wages were among the top answers when respondents were asked what could have kept them out of prison.[14] Another study found that 72% of respondents cited the lack of affordable housing as one of the most significant barriers to securing housing post-release.[15]
An estimated four out of five private landlords use background checks.[16] Private landlords are also often unwilling to rent to people who have a criminal record. The screening criteria for background checks are ambiguous and the companies that conduct them are unregulated, placing applicants at risk of discriminatory practices.[17] One study documented that more than 4,600 housing units in the Washington, D.C., area were unavailable to people with criminal histories because of blanket bans on felony convictions by private landlords.[18] Many landlords also ask for credit checks, which can compound barriers for people who could not establish a stable credit history prior to, during, or after incarceration.[19] Further, many communities lack a sufficient infrastructure of available services for substance abuse, behavioral health, and reentry, making landlords and housing authorities wary of accepting formerly incarcerated prospective tenants who lack sufficient reentry support.
Many of the barriers faced while trying to rent a home also impact people with a criminal record when they try to buy a home. Some mortgage lenders may conduct a criminal background check during the application phase.[20] However, even with no background check, some lenders require a credit history which can pose the same issues as it does for a renter. A formerly incarcerated person could make it past the application phase for a mortgage but then face higher interest rates.[21] There are few legal protections that prevent a lender from charging a higher rate or denying a loan application if a person has a criminal background.[22]
This overall policy landscape significantly hinders a formerly incarcerated person’s ability to obtain adequate housing. One study found that 8 in 10 formerly incarcerated people were either ineligible for or denied housing because of their own criminal record or a loved one’s.[23] As a result, many people rely on family members for housing support. The same study found that 58% of respondents lived with their families, but 1 in 10 participants reported being evicted after their loved one with a criminal record moved in.[24]
For these reasons, people with a criminal record face a high risk of housing insecurity, mental health issues, relapse, and homelessness.[25] A study found that men who had been previously incarcerated were twice as likely to become homeless as men without a history of incarceration.[26] For returning citizens with children, the inability to obtain adequate housing can prevent them from regaining custody.[27] Such instability can lead to higher rates of recidivism.[28] Studies have found that people without stable housing post-release are twice as likely to recidivate.[29]
HISTORY
Although not a constitutional right, housing has long been recognized as crucial to stability. The provision of “decent and affordable housing for all citizens” was first affirmed in the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 and later strengthened by the prohibition against housing discrimination in the Fair Housing Act of 1968.[30]
In the 1980s, concerns arose regarding drug abuse and distribution in public housing. In response, Congress passed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, empowering public housing agencies (PHAs) to terminate leases for drug-related criminal activity by the tenant or any member or guest of their household.[31] In 1996, HUD issued guidance designed to further strengthen PHAs’ anti-drug and anti-crime initiatives.[32] The guidance encouraged PHAs to follow “one strike and you’re out” rules for screening and eviction.[33] These strict policies permitted denial of housing or eviction for any “criminal activity” (including mere arrests) by the applicant or a household member.[34]
Although public housing tenants and their advocates challenged the constitutionality of such policies, the Supreme Court affirmed HUD’s anti-drug guidance in its 2002 HUD v. Rucker decision. The Court held that a local PHA may evict innocent household members for the drug-related activity of other household members or guests.[35]
NOTEWORTHY REFORMS
Signed into law by President George W. Bush, the bipartisan Second Chance Act of 2007 has provided federal grants for investments in supportive and recovery housing for people leaving incarceration. In 2016, HUD issued new guidance that walked back many facets of the “one-strike” era.[36] HUD stressed that certain policies previously adopted by PHAs due to public safety concerns were no longer justifiable. Under the new guidance, PHAs are not required to adopt or enforce “one-strike” rules; may not deny admission or trigger eviction based solely on an arrest record; and may not implement blanket bans on applicants with certain convictions.[37] In response to the updated guidance from HUD, some PHAs have made housing more accessible to formerly incarcerated people.
In 2021, Illinois became the first state to pass legislation that removed barriers to public housing for people with a criminal record.[38] Illinois’s Public Housing Access Bill set a six-month look-back period, removed certain restrictions for people in reentry, and limited the ability to refuse housing.[39] While Illinois was the first to make statewide progress, many localities across the nation have taken their own steps to reduce barriers. For example, the New Orleans Public Housing Authority no longer treats criminal history as an automatic disqualifier for prospective applicants.[40] Several jurisdictions, including Oklahoma City, have reduced their look-back periods from five years to three years.[41] Also, five public housing agencies within Delaware launched a program that allows people with a criminal record to live with a family member in subsidized housing.[42]
Additionally, departments of corrections, reentry organizations, and other entities have begun working with private landlords to provide transitional housing and increase affordable housing inventory.[43]
[1] Jaboa Lake, Preventing and Removing Barriers to Housing Security for People with Criminal Convictions, Center for American Program (April 2021), https://www.americanprogress.org/article/preventing-removing-barriers-housing-security-people-criminal-convictions/.
[2] Saneta deVuono-powell, et al., Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families, Ella Baker Center, Forward Together, Research Action Design (Sept. 2015), https://www.whopaysreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Who-Pays-FINAL.pdf.
[3] Id.
[4] JPMorgan Chase & Co, Policy Recommendations for Affordable Rental Housing and Homeownership, JPMorgan Chase & Co. Policy Center (June 2021), https://www.jpmorganchase.com/content/dam/jpmc/jpmorgan-chase-and-co/documents/policycenter-affordable-housing.pdf.
[5] Justice Center, National Inventory of the Collateral Consequences of Conviction, The Council of State Governments (2023), https://niccc.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/consequences.
[6] Lake, supra note 1.
[7] USCCR, Collateral Consequences: The Crossroads of Punishment, Redemption, and the Effects on Communities, United States Commission on Civil Rights (June 2019), https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2019/06-13-Collateral-Consequences.pdf.
[8] Id. at 65.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Id. at 72.
[13] Id. (Private housing is oftentimes more expensive than public housing.)
[14] Lake, supra note 1.
[15] Saneta deVuono-powell, supra note 2, at 27.
[16] USCCR, supra note 7, at 73.
[17] Lake, supra note 1.
[18] USCCR, supra note 7, at 74.
[19] Id. at 73.
[20] Marianne Hayes, Do Mortgage Companies Run Background Checks?, Experian (June 2021), https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/do-mortgage-companies-run-background-checks/.
[21] NAR, Fair Housing Act: Criminal History-Based Practices and Policies, National Association of Realtors Legal Affairs Department (April 2016), https://cdn.nar.realtor//sites/default/files/policies/2016/2016-04-07-hud-guidance-criminal-history-policies.pdf.
[22] HUD, Office of General Counsel Guidance on Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Use of Criminal Records by Providers of Housing and Real Estate-Related Transactions, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (April 2016), https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/HUD_OGCGUIDAPPFHASTANDCR.PDF.
[23] Saneta deVuono-powell, supra note 2, at 26.
[24] Id.
[25] Corinne A. Carey, No Second Chance: People with Criminal Records Denied Access to Public Housing, 36 U. Tol. Le. Rev. 545, 564-65 (2005).
[26] USCCR, supra note 7, at 62.
[27] Carey, supra note 26, at 564
[28] USCCR, supra note 7, at 60-61.
[29] Id. at 64.
[30] Carey, supra note 26, at 548.
[31] Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev. v. Rucker, 535 U.S. 125, 127 (2002).
[32] USCCR, supra note 7, at 65.
[33] USSCR, supra note 7, at 65; Carey, supra note 26, at 554.
[34] USCCR, supra note 7, at 65.
[35] Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev. v. Rucker, 535 U.S. 125, 127-28 (2002).
[36] USCCR, supra note 7, at 68.
[37] USCCR, supra note 7, at 74-75.
[38] Jacqueline Altamirano Marin, et al., Illinois Bill Makes History, Highlights Criminalization-to-Homelessness Pipeline, Vera Institute of Justice (Feb. 2021), https://www.vera.org/news/illinois-bill-makes-history-highlights-criminalization-to-homelessness-pipeline.
[39] Id.
[40] USCCR, supra note 7.
[41] Vera, Opening Doors, Returning Home: How Public Housing Authorities Across the Country Are Expanding Access for People with Conviction Histories, Vera Institute of Justice (Feb. 2022), https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/opening-doors-returning-home.pdf.
[42] Id.
[43] Charles Francis & Stephanie Joson, How States are Engaging Private Landlords – an Untapped Resource in Reentry Housing, The Council of State Governments Justice Center (Oct. 2021), https://csgjusticecenter.org/2021/10/15/how-states-are-engaging-private-landlords-an-untapped-resource-in-reentry-housing/.