Tenants have a right of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a number of violations of the United States Housing Act.1 These claims typically arise in the context of public or other subsidized housing evictions in violation of statutory and constitutional procedural requirements.2 Specifically, federal courts have repeatedly found that certain subsidized tenants have a cause of action under 24 C.F.R. § 1983 if their subsidies are terminated without proper notice and an opportunity to respond in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(k).3 The U.S. Supreme Court has also recognized that certain subsidized tenants can sue under § 1983 for violations of the Brooke Amendment, 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(a)(1), which limits the rent and utility burden in several HUD subsidy programs.4 Advocates should be sure to follow developments in the law that may limit use of § 1983 to enforce federal rights.
- 142 U.S.C. § 1437, et seq.
- 2For more complete discussion of these requirements, see this manual's chapter on federally subsidized housing.
- 3Poole v. Hous. Auth. for the Town of Vinton, 202 F. Supp. 3d 617, 624 (W.D. La. 2016); Farley v. Phila. Hous. Auth., 102 F.3d 697, 698 (3d Cir. 1996); Stevenson v. Willis, 579 F. Supp. 2d 913, 923 (N.D. Ohio 2008); Conway v. Hous. Auth. of City of Asheville, 239 F. Supp. 2d 593, 599 (W.D.N.C. 2002); Gammons v. Mass. Dep’t of Hous. & Cmty. Dev., 523 F. Supp. 2d 76, 84 (D. Mass. 2007).
- 4Wright v. City of Roanoke Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 479 U.S. 418 (1987) (regarding utility allowances).