Facebook Sued by Housing Advocates Over Alleged Discriminatory Ad Practices
The suit by the National Fair Housing Alliance and other advocate groups alleges that the social media company allows landlords and realtors to block protected groups from access to housing ads, in violation of the Fair Housing Act.
March 27, 2018 at 12:43 PM
3 minute read
Photo: aradaphotography/Shutterstock.com
Housing rights advocate organizations sued Facebook in Manhattan federal court Tuesday over what they allege is the social media giant's practice of allowing landlords and real estate brokers to keep certain groups of users from seeing housing ads.
According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Facebook allows housing advertisers access to a pre-populated list built on the personal information shared by Facebook users. These advertisers are then able to exclude housing seekers from viewing or receiving rental or sales ads based on legally protected categories, such as family status and sex.
The National Fair Housing Alliance and the other plaintiffs claim that investigations done in housing markets in New York, Washington, D.C., Miami and San Antonio confirmed what they call Facebook's discriminatory practices under the Fair Housing Act and New York City human rights law.
“Amid growing public concern in the past weeks that Facebook has mishandled users' data, our investigation shows that Facebook also allows and even encourages its paid advertisers to discriminate using its vast trove of personal data,” Lisa Rice, NFHA's president and CEO, said in a statement. “It is already a challenge for women, families with children, people with disabilities and other under-served groups to find housing. Facebook's platform that excludes these consumers from ever seeing certain ads to rent or buy housing must be changed immediately.”
The groups say they went through the ad-creation process with Facebook. According to the complaint, Facebook provides the option for advertisers to exclude families with children and women from receiving advertisements, as well as users with interests based on disability and national origin. Then, the plaintiffs claim, Facebook approves and permits advertisers to publish ads that exclude the selected groups from access without users ever knowing they have been excluded.
The housing advocates note that Facebook has been made aware that its practices could be illegally discriminating against users. The complaint notes that in October 2016, ProPublica published a report about the social media site allowing advertisers to exclude users based on their race. They said they have also raised the issue with the company.
“Facebook has known for years that its advertising platform violates civil rights laws but it has refused to change its ways on a voluntary basis,” Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady of counsel Diane Houk, counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “Facebook is not above the law and must answer these civil rights claims in court.”
The suit is just the latest legal issue arising for the company, as it faces fallout around news the political consultancy firm Cambridge Analytica, which worked on behalf of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign, acquired the personal information of 50 million users through potentially underhanded, or even illegal, means.
On Monday, the Federal Trade Commission announced it has launched an investigation into Facebook's privacy practices. Additionally, the Cook County state's attorney in Illinois announced the office was suing Facebook for failing to take steps to prevent the harvesting of its users' personal data by Cambridge Analytica.
In a statement, a spokeswoman from Facebook said that, while ”there is absolutely no place for discrimination on Facebook,” the company believes “this lawsuit is without merit, and we will defend ourselves vigorously.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Attorneys 'On the Move': Structured Finance Attorney Joins Hunton Andrews Kurth; Foley Adds IP Partner
4 minute read
NY Civil Liberties Legal Director Stepping Down After Lengthy Tenure
Former Top Aide to NYC Mayor Is Charged With Bribery Conspiracy
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
