Question

Under the federal fair housing act of 1968 (title 8), this wouldn't be protected?

a. refusal to rent to an unmarried couple
b. requiring an extra security deposit, because of the tenants religion
c. a bank redlining a neighborhood, due to redial population
d. showing a buyer a property in a specific neighborhood, because of the buyers race or religion

Answer 1

Requiring an extra security deposit because of a tenant's religion would not be protected under the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibits housing discrimination based on protected characteristics such as religion.

Step-by-step explanation:

Under the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 (Title 8), the practice that would not be protected is b. requiring an extra security deposit, because of the tenant's religion. This act explicitly prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Therefore, any differential treatment based on religion, such as requiring a higher security deposit, would violate this federal law. Moreover, redlining neighborhoods based on racial composition is likewise illegal under this act, whereas refusing to rent to an unmarried couple (a non-protected characteristic under this act) is not. Practices that rely on race, color, religion, or national origin to determine housing opportunities are considered discriminatory and are not protected under the Fair Housing Act.

Answer 2

The action not protected under the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 (Title VIII) is demonstrating a property to a potential buyer in a particular neighborhood based on the buyer's race or religion.

The correct answer is option d. showing a buyer a property in a specific neighborhood, because of the buyer's race or religion.

Step-by-step explanation:

The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Therefore, it is illegal to discriminate against a buyer by showing or not showing a property based on their race or religion. The Act aims to ensure equal housing opportunities for all individuals and promotes fair and open access to housing without regard to certain protected characteristics.

A. Refusal to rent to an unmarried couple could be considered discrimination based on marital status, which is protected under the Fair Housing Act.

B. Requiring an extra security deposit based on the tenant's religion is discriminatory and not protected under the Fair Housing Act.

C. Redlining a neighborhood based on racial population is a discriminatory lending practice and is not protected under the Fair Housing Act. Redlining involves denying loans or insurance to people based on their race or the racial composition of their neighborhood.

Therefore, the correct answer is option d. showing a buyer a property in a specific neighborhood, because of the buyer's race or religion.