HUD Ends Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule—Again

The AFFH rule, rooted in a section of the 1968 Fair Housing Act, was designed to combat housing discrimination and segregation by requiring local governments to take proactive steps toward fair housing goals. The idea of “affirmatively furthering fair housing” originates from the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which not only banned housing discrimination but also mandated that federal agencies and grant recipients work actively toward fair housing objectives.

For many years, this requirement lacked a formal enforcement mechanism until the Obama administration strengthened it. At that time, HUD introduced an official AFFH regulation that expanded federal oversight of local zoning and housing policies. Under the rule, jurisdictions receiving HUD funds had to conduct extensive analyses of fair housing issues in their communities. Local governments were required to complete a 92-question assessment tool and submit detailed reports identifying fair housing barriers and outlining plans to address them. The goal was to ensure that cities and counties actively worked to reduce segregation and increase access to affordable housing in high-opportunity areas.

“Expensive, Complicated, Ineffective”

Later, during President Trump’s first term, the AFFH rule was effectively dismantled. HUD, under Secretary Ben Carson, suspended the Obama-era requirements, calling the 2015 rule “expensive, complicated, and ineffective.” In 2020, it was replaced with a much simpler policy—the “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule. Under this approach, a jurisdiction simply had to pledge that it was taking any action remotely related to fair housing (even minimal efforts), and it would be deemed in compliance. This change removed detailed assessments and federal oversight, effectively shifting most decision-making power back to local officials.

Then, early in his presidency, President Biden took steps to reinstate the AFFH rule. HUD repealed the Trump-era policy and reinstated key provisions of the 2015 rule. In 2021, an interim rule once again required jurisdictions to actively monitor and address fair housing challenges, and in 2023, HUD proposed an even stronger AFFH rule that would require more aggressive action from localities to promote equity. The Biden administration made AFFH a central part of its strategy to expand access to affordable housing and reverse historical patterns of segregation.

“Returning Local Control to Communities”

Current HUD Secretary Scott Turner has criticized the Obama/Biden AFFH framework as federal overreach, calling it a “zoning tax” that drove up development costs and restricted housing supply. By repealing the rule, HUD now allows local governments to simply certify that they are “affirmatively furthering fair housing” without needing to meet more stringent requirements.

This decision has sparked strong opposition from Democratic lawmakers. Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Financial Services Committee, and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, recently issued a statement condemning the repeal. “Secretary Turner is abandoning HUD’s legal obligation to eliminate housing discrimination in the United States,” they stated. “At a time when America is experiencing a full-blown housing crisis and record levels of housing discrimination complaints, this outright assault on civil rights takes us back to the days when the federal government rubber-stamped segregation and discrimination.” They argue that eliminating the AFFH rule removes a key tool for making housing more affordable and accessible for people of color, older Americans, veterans, people with disabilities, families with children, and many others.

It’s important to note that the repeal of the AFFH rule does not eliminate fair housing responsibilities. Core fair housing laws remain fully in effect. For site owners and managers, day-to-day compliance with non-discrimination rules as applied to tenant selection, marketing, and accommodations remain unchanged. These responsibilities continue to be governed by the Fair Housing Act and related regulations.