Intermountain Fair Housing Council v. Boise Rescue Mission Ministries
657 F.3d 988
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Defendant Boise Rescue Mission Ministries operates a Christian drug-treatment program and two homeless shelters in Boise, Idaho.
- Cowles participated in the drug-treatment program; Chinn stayed at the shelters at various times.
- Cowles alleges sex and religious discrimination and retaliation in violation of the FHA; Chinn alleges religious discrimination.
- HUD investigated and dismissed the complaints, finding the program to be faith-based and noting a religious exemption, and finding no discriminatory housing practice.
- Plaintiffs sued in district court; the district court granted summary judgment for Defendant.
- The Ninth Circuit affirming, holds §3607(a) religion exemption applies to the challenged practices.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FHA §3607(a) exempts Defendant's practices from discrimination claims. | Cowles/Chinn contend exemption does not apply to shelters or treatment program. | Defendant argues exemption permits limiting to same religion and giving preference to adherents. | Exemption applies; practices do not violate FHA. |
| Whether FHA §3604(a)/(b) apply to Defendant's shelters. | Plaintiffs contend HUD findings show violations under §3604(a)/(b). | Shelters may be exempt if §3607(a) applies; scope not determinative here. | Court assumes §3604(a)/(b) could apply but §3607(a) exempts the challenged practices. |
| Whether Cowles' sex-discrimination claim survives under the FHA. | Cowles asserts gender-based disparities in program participation. | No competent evidence of sex-based difference; parallel men program not shown. | Affirm summary judgment for Defendant on sex-discrimination claim. |
| Whether Plaintiffs' §3617 interference/retaliation claim survives. | Claims rely on alleged discrimination in violation of §3604. | No right under §3604 to exercise; no retaliation claim if no protected right. | Affirm summary judgment; retaliation claims fail. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., 514 U.S. 725 (U.S. 1995) (narrow construction of FHA exemption 3607(a))
- Lakeside Resort Enters., LP v. Bd. of Supervisors, 455 F.3d 154 (3d Cir. 2006) (definition of residence for FHA purposes debated by circuits)
- Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island, 544 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2008) (definition of residence; religious exemptions considered)
- Casey v. Lewis, 4 F.3d 1516 (9th Cir. 1993) (conclusory affidavits insufficient to defeat summary judgment)
- Gementera v. United States, 379 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2004) (established amicus/issue waiver principle)