A group of current and former Department of Housing and Urban Development employees launched a website this week, DearAmericaletters.org, alleging the Trump administration is blocking enforcement of federal fair housing laws. The authors remain anonymous, they say, because they fear retaliation or being fired.
Letters posted to the site argue that HUD has effectively halted civil rights enforcement and is selectively excluding certain protected classes from investigation. Other posts describe staff who were forced to abandon cases and plead for justice on behalf of people denied safe housing.
Last fall two HUD civil rights lawyers were fired after raising concerns with Congress that the agency was unlawfully narrowing enforcement. One of those former lawyers, Paul Osadebe, helped launch the website and spoke with NPR in his personal capacity and as a steward for AFGE Local 476. He says the agency continues to restrict investigations, especially those involving race and gender. “We’re not being allowed to help the people that we’re supposed to be serving,” he said. NPR has asked HUD for comment.
Under the 1968 Fair Housing Act, HUD is charged with investigating complaints of discrimination based on race, national origin, religion, sex, family status or disability, and pursuing enforcement when discrimination is found. But HUD Secretary Scott Turner has criticized how the law has been applied, saying in a Fair Housing Month video that it was distorted to advance what he described as “radical ideologies” tied to diversity, equity and inclusion. Turner accused the previous administration of “weaponizing” the Fair Housing Act and said the current leadership is restoring sanity to enforcement.
Turner cited a proposed rule that would eliminate liability for unintentional discrimination under the disparate impact standard — a legal theory advocates say is essential for addressing hidden or systemic bias. He also pointed to HUD reviews of programs in Boston, Minneapolis and Washington state that aim to address historical racial disparities, suggesting those initiatives could amount to discrimination against white people.
Internal HUD memos last year instructed staff to reduce compliance requirements and listed categories of cases to be eliminated as priorities, including some involving gender identity, environmental justice and certain race-based matters that protect a group rather than an identifiable individual. HUD has also told states it will not reimburse them for certain discrimination investigations tied to sexual orientation, gender identity, criminal-record exclusions, voucher use or English-language proficiency. Fifteen Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia have sued, arguing the changes are arbitrary and unconstitutional.
Former HUD fair housing chief Sara Pratt said the shifts amount to a reversal of federal civil rights practice. While states may adopt stronger protections, she said, the federal posture now limits what state agencies can pursue with federal support.
Employees who contributed to the website describe an atmosphere of demoralization and attrition: portrayals of civil rights staff as lazy, mass firings, forced resignations and reassignments that have thinned experienced ranks and made it harder for remaining staff to investigate and litigate. They warn that people who need remedies — including unhoused individuals, families with disabled children and survivors of domestic violence — could be left without recourse.
One anonymous writer told NPR that broad executive orders and a shift in ideology have made HUD attorneys reluctant to provide the legal interpretations they would have in the past, leading investigators to err on the side of inaction. That caution, the writer said, risks narrowing the interpretation of sex-based protections so they no longer include LGBTQ people.
Osadebe also said HUD has directed staff to speak only English with clients after a presidential order designating English the country’s official language, a policy he called impractical for non-English-speaking U.S. citizens in places such as Puerto Rico.
Many employees say fear of being silenced, attacked or losing their jobs discourages internal dissent. Osadebe said he hopes the anonymous letters spur congressional oversight and encourage federal workers across agencies to raise concerns. “We’re all experiencing the same things,” he said.