The following states and cities prohibit discrimination against Section 8 voucher participants:

1. New Jersey Statute

a. "No person, firm, or corporation or any agent, officer or employee thereof shall refuse to rent or lease any house or apartment to another person because of the source of any lawful income received by the person or the source of any lawful rent payment to be paid for the house or apartment." (NJSA 2A:42-100)

b. In 1998, New Jersey's highest court upheld the statute stating that Section 8 vouchers are covered because the statute prohibits discrimination not only against source of income but also against the source of a lawful rent payment. There is no federal preemption because there is nothing in the federal statute that explicitly preempts state legislation requiring landlords to honor Section 8 vouchers. Franklin Tower One v. N.M, 157 N.J. 602 (1999).

2. Chicago

a. "It shall be an unfair practice and unlawful...:A. To make any distinction, discrimination or restriction against any person in the price, terms, conditions or privileges of any kind relating to the sale, rental, lease or occupancy of any real estate used for residential purposes in the City of Chicago...predicated upon the race, color, sex, age, religion, disability, ... , or source of income of the prospective or actual buyer or tenant thereof." (Chicago Fair Housing Ordinance § 5-08-030)

b. The city established an adjudication unit that enforces the fair housing ordinance with fines. The adjudication unit defined source of income as a section 8 voucher.

3. State of Massachusetts

a. Unlawful Discrimination: "It shall be an unlawful practice...For any person furnishing credit, services or rental accommodations to discriminate against any individual who is a recipient of federal, state, or local ublic assistance, including medical assistance, or who is a tenant receiving federal, state, or local housing subsidies, including rental assistance or rental supplements, because the individual is such a recipient, or because of any requirement of such public assistance, rental assistance, or housing subsidy program. (General Laws of Massachusetts, Ch 151B: Section 4(10))

4. Connecticut

a. “It shall be a discriminatory practice in violation of this section: to refuse to sell or rent after making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of ¼. lawful source of income.” (Connecticut General Statutes, §46a-64c)

b. “Source of income is defines as income derived from “social security, [SSI], housing assistance, child support, alimony or public or general assistance.” (Connecticut General Statutes, §46a-63(3)).

c. Statute upheld by State Supreme Court in Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 739 A.2d 238 (1999).

5. District of Columbia

a. On January 8, 2002, the DC City Council adopted a Section 8 anti-discrimination law (BILL 14-183, Sections 209 and 210).  These sections provide that any Section 8 assistance that is received either directly or through a tenant, shall be considered income and a source of income under section 231 of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act.  Furthermore, the owner of a housing accommodation shall not refuse to rent a dwelling unit to a person because the person will provide his or her rental payment, in whole or in part, through a section 8 voucher. Enforcement measures are also provided, allowing for the collection of monetary civil fines for owner non-compliance and mandating that such fines be paid into the existing Housing Production Trust Fund.  The Mayor is also authorized to commence enforcement proceedings for any fine not paid within the time frame set forth in regulations. (Cite will be posted when available.)

Many thanks to Christian Abasto, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles for his assistance in preparing much of this information.