DOJ Housing Discrimination: Federal Consent Decree for Systematic Racial Bias in Rental Properties
Tier 1Resolved1973-10-15 to 1978-01-01
Factual Summary
On October 15, 1973, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil rights suit in the Eastern District of New York against Fred C. Trump, Donald J. Trump, and Trump Management, Inc. The suit alleged systematic violations of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 across a portfolio of roughly 14,000 apartments in New York City.
The allegations centered on the exclusion of Black and Puerto Rican applicants from Trump-owned rental properties. Evidence gathered by the FBI between 1972 and 1974, along with testing operations conducted by the Open Housing Center beginning in August 1972, revealed several discriminatory practices. Employees marked rental applications from Black applicants with a "C" for "colored." Management steered Black and Puerto Rican applicants toward buildings with higher concentrations of non-white residents. Government testers of different races reported receiving materially different information about apartment availability at the same properties.
In one documented instance, a leasing agent named Stanley Leibowitz reported that he told Fred Trump a Black nurse named Maxine Brown had submitted a "beautiful application." Fred Trump allegedly instructed him to place it in a drawer and leave it there. In another instance, a leasing manager allegedly told a Black applicant directly that the complex "discriminated against blacks."
On June 10, 1975, Judge Edward Raymond Neaher entered a consent decree. The decree prohibited discrimination in rentals, required Trump Management to place equal housing opportunity notices in all advertising, mandated that weekly vacancy lists be provided to the New York Urban League for two years, required anti-discrimination staff training, and imposed detailed recordkeeping for compliance monitoring. The decree explicitly stated it was "in no way an admission" of violations.
In 1978, the DOJ filed a motion for supplemental relief, alleging that "racially discriminatory conduct by Trump agents has occurred with such frequency that it has created a substantial impediment to the full enjoyment of equal opportunity." The original consent decree expired before the DOJ accumulated sufficient evidence to press the supplemental case.
Primary Sources
1. Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, Case No. 1:73-01529 (E.D.N.Y.): https://clearinghouse.net/case/15342/
2. Consent Order, June 10, 1975: https://clearinghouse.net/doc/83283/
3. FBI Vault, Trump Management Company investigation records (FOIA release): https://vault.fbi.gov/trump-management-company
4. DOJ Civil Rights Division case document: https://www.justice.gov/crt/case-document/file/983831/dl
Corroborating Sources
1. Washington Post: "Inside the government's racial bias case against Donald Trump's company, and how he fought it," January 23, 2016
2. NPR: "Donald Trump's Housing Discrimination Case Still Chases Him Decades Later," September 29, 2016
3. Time: "Donald Trump's 1973 Discrimination Case Really Was Part of a Pattern," September 27, 2016
Counterarguments and Context
At a December 1973 press conference, Donald Trump stated he had never discriminated or shown bias in renting apartments. Trump accused the DOJ of singling out his company because of its size and public profile. He characterized the suit as an attempt by the government to compel Trump properties to accept welfare recipients as tenants, framing it as a housing policy dispute rather than a race discrimination matter. Trump Management filed a $100 million countersuit against the DOJ alleging defamation. That countersuit was dismissed. The consent decree was signed without any admission of wrongdoing or liability.
Author's Note
This case is classified under Labor, Contractor, and Employment Abuses because it concerns discriminatory practices in the rental housing business operated by Trump Management. There was no trial and no judicial finding of liability. The case ended by consent decree. The 1978 supplemental enforcement action did not result in a new court order, contempt citation, or admission of wrongdoing.