A Sacramento-area property management company is taking California to court over a state law that requires landlords to accept tenants who rely on federal housing vouchers, arguing the rule amounts to an unconstitutional search of their property.
The lawsuit, filed last week by Tower Bridge Property Management and its owner, Tom Manning, targets a 2020 California law that bars landlords from turning away renters simply because they use a Section 8 voucher to help cover their rent. The program, formally known as the Housing Choice Voucher Program, is designed to help low-income tenants afford housing on the private market — though funding has never stretched far enough to serve every eligible household.
Tower Bridge, which oversees roughly 300 rental units in the Sacramento region, contends that the inspection and paperwork requirements tied to accepting voucher payments violate the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches. Under the law, landlords who rent to voucher holders must first allow local housing authorities to inspect their units for health and safety issues, then submit documentation to both local and federal agencies.
The case, filed with backing from the libertarian-leaning Pacific Legal Foundation, mirrors arguments that have gained traction elsewhere. Earlier this year, a New York appellate court sided with a similar challenge and struck down that state’s ban on voucher discrimination. A conservative legal group in Virginia has raised a comparable argument there as well.
California is one of 15 states, along with Washington, D.C., that explicitly prohibit landlords from refusing tenants based on their use of housing vouchers. Since the law took effect, tenant advocacy groups have filed a string of civil rights lawsuits against landlords accused of skirting the requirement — often using undercover “testers” who pose as voucher holders to document rejections.
The issue drew national attention last month when a nonprofit watchdog organization accused Greystar, the country’s largest apartment landlord, of systematically denying housing to voucher holders nationwide, including in California properties.
The Pacific Legal Foundation, which is representing Manning, has previously challenged other California housing policies, including developer impact fees and inclusionary zoning requirements that mandate affordable units in new construction.
It remains to be seen how the case will play out in California courts, but housing advocates are watching closely, given the precedent set in New York and the broader legal momentum against similar tenant protection laws in other states.
Original source: CalMatters
