Q: During an interview with a potential landlord, we were asked some odd questions that, on reflection, seemed designed to find out if we are religious.
For example, a landlord’s remark during an interview that few Catholics live on the property could be evidence of that landlord’s preference for non-Catholics. Conversely, a landlord’s repeated references to a nearby synagogue and the house rule for quiet hours between sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday could be taken to convey a preference for religious Jews.
What you encountered, however, was not a preference for or against people in specific religions, but evidence of the landlord’s preference for religious persons in general. The question is, did Congress intend to protect people who are not religious from discrimination to the same extent that members of mainstream religions are protected?
This question has been answered with a resounding “yes” in the employment context. Simply put, religious freedom includes the freedom to reject religion: For the purposes of anti-discrimination law, not believing in God (or a particular religion’s version of same) is a protected religious belief. If employers refuse to hire or otherwise discriminate against humanists, agnostics or atheists, employees can sue for religious discrimination. As odd as it may seem (particularly to atheists), these laws treat atheism as a form of religion.
To my knowledge, no state or federal court has addressed the question in a rental context, however. If you were to take your case to court, you’d be asking the judge to take a cue from the employment cases and give you the protection of the anti-discrimination laws.
But then you’d face two more significant hurdles. First, you’d have to prove that the landlord’s questions were intended to ferret out nonreligious applicants (or had the effect of discouraging nonreligious applicants). Though the questions seem pointed, they could simply be an inept attempt at small talk by someone who is trying to get to know you.
And if you couldn’t prove discriminatory intent, you’d have the burden of proving that others like you thought that the landlord was discriminating and felt discriminated against. That is a tall order. Second, you’d need to convince the judge that your answers were more likely than not the cause of your not getting the rental. Again, not an easy task.
Copyright 2009 Janet Portman
To subscribe to our blog, click here.