Federal guidance documents explain how agencies interpret and enforce the law. Guidance does not create new law or override court decisions; it helps clarify how existing legal protections apply in specific situations — such as tenant screening, school discipline, or the use of artificial intelligence in hiring.
Under the Trump administration, some federal guidance documents have been formally withdrawn, and others have simply been taken offline. Even so, many of these documents continue to reflect widely accepted interpretations of federal civil rights laws. Courts may still find these interpretations persuasive, and they remain a useful resource for understanding rights, responsibilities, and enforcement risks.
This page collects key federal guidance related to housing, education, employment, and artificial intelligence to help the public understand protections that remain in place.
Federal housing guidance largely comes from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). The documents below were removed from government websites or formally withdrawn, but they continue to explain how the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and related laws apply in practice.
What the documents Cover
These guidance documents explain how the FHA applies to the use of criminal history by landlords and other housing providers. They address when criminal background screening policies may have an unjustified discriminatory effect — particularly on Black people and other people of color — and therefore violate the FHA.
Because of longstanding discriminatory policies and practices throughout the criminal legal system, Black people are disproportionately arrested, prosecuted, and incarcerated. Overbroad criminal history exclusions violate the Fair Housing Act.
Landlords may not exclude applicants based on arrest records alone.
Private landlords should consider not using criminal convictions to screen tenants, as they are not a good predictor of housing success.
If housing providers choose to consider criminal history, the guidance explains they should:
What the documents cover
These documents explain how certain local nuisance and crime-free housing ordinances can violate the Fair Housing Act and other federal civil rights laws. Such ordinances may penalize tenants for calling police or emergency services or require eviction after alleged criminal activity, even when tenants are victims of crime.
Nuisance and crime-free housing ordinances can violate the FHA if the ordinance was intended to discriminate, is selectively enforced, or disproportionately excludes women, including Black women, without justification.
Penalizing tenants for seeking emergency assistance can endanger the safety and lives of victims of domestic violence or other crimes.
Proving that these ordinances are justified by a substantial, legitimate interest is a “difficult burden” under fair housing law.
Repealing such ordinances can help local governments meet their obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.
What the Document Covers
This guidance explains the obligations of HUD funding recipients to provide meaningful access to individuals with limited English proficiency, consistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English are usually qualified as LEP individuals.
Failure to ensure LEP individuals can effectively participate in or benefit from HUD federally assisted programs may violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964's prohibition against national origin discrimination.
These guidance documents explain housing providers’ obligations to grant reasonable accommodations for assistance animals — including service animals and emotional support animals — under the FHA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
People with disabilities must be allowed to use assistance animals in housing that otherwise prohibits pets.
Assistance animals are not pets under federal fair housing law.
Although a landlord may prohibit use of an assistance animal in certain instances, those reasons must apply to the specific animal and not to stereotypes based on breed or size.
What the Document Covers
This guidance directed HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) to fully enforce the Fair Housing Act’s prohibition on discrimination because of sexual orientation and gender identity.
The FHA’s prohibition on sex discrimination also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
What the Document Covers
This guidance confirmed that properly structured Special Purpose Credit Programs are lawful under the FHA and encouraged their use to expand access to credit for historically underserved communities.
SPCPs allow financial institutions to expand credit access for underserved borrowers who have been locked out of opportunities they need to get access to loans to buy a home. For example, lenders could create a mortgage assistance program for first-time homebuyers in certain areas.
SPCPs are a tool for tackling the racial wealth and homeownership gaps and ensuring housing is genuinely fair, open, and available to all people.
While SPCP’s are specifically permitted under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), the guidance explains that Congress intended the FHA and ECOA to coexist and complement each other — meaning SPCP’s are allowed under the Fair Housing Act.
This guidance explains tenant protections under federal law related to background checks used in rental housing decisions.
Federal law prohibits discrimination in tenant background checks and requires background check companies to take reasonable steps to ensure the information obtained is accurate.
Background check companies must take reasonable steps to ensure accuracy.
Tenants have the right to dispute false or incomplete information and seek assistance if their rights are violated.
Tenants can get help if a background check company does not follow the law by responding to a dispute or correcting false information.
Tenants can get help if they believe they have experienced discrimination.
Federal education guidance primarily comes from the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. The documents below explain how federal civil rights laws continue to apply in pre-K–12 and higher education settings.
What the Document Covers
This guidance explains how schools can lawfully foster racially inclusive educational environments under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The guidance document includes several examples that illustrate how Title VI applies to different actions schools might take related to fostering racially inclusive school environments.
Actions taken to foster racially inclusive school communities do not generally violate Title VI.
Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin.
Schools may violate Title VI if they:
The guidance includes examples showing that affinity groups — such as an African American Students Association — are permissible when open to all students.
What the Documents Covers
The fact sheet explains how schools governed by Title VI can lawfully advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.
The Q&A addresses what colleges and universities may continue to do following the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC.
Colleges and universities can still consider how race has affected a student’s life experiences.
Colleges and universities can continue to try to achieve diversity and use all legally permissible methods to achieve that diversity, including:
Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives are not categorically prohibited under Title VI.
Title VI generally permits:
What the Document Covers
This resource explains schools’ obligations to address hostile environments based on race, color, or national origin.
A hostile environment exists when conduct is severe or pervasive enough to limit or deny a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from an education program.
Harassment creates a hostile environment based on race, color, or national origin when staff, a student, or another person engages in unwelcome conduct that is subjectively and objectively offensive and the severity of which limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the recipient’s education program or activity.
When schools know or should have known about a hostile environment, they have the responsibility under Title VI to take prompt and effective steps to end the harassment, eliminate the hostile environment and its effects, and prevent the harassment from recurring.
Remedial actions must not themselves discriminate on the basis of race.
The resource includes a list of the types of remedial actions that schools can take to remedy a hostile environment.
What the Document Covers
This resource describes federal enforcement of Title VI in school discipline cases across multiple states and districts.
Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in the administration of school discipline policies.
The responsibility not to discriminate applies to all school staff and contractors, including lunch or recess monitors, substitute teachers, cafeteria staff, bus drivers, security staff, private security companies, school district police officers, and school resource officers.
When schools know or should have known about a hostile environment, they have the responsibility under Title VI to take prompt and effective steps to end the harassment, eliminate the hostile environment and its effects, and prevent the harassment from recurring.
The resource includes examples where Black students were punished more harshly and frequently than similarly situated white students.
This guidance outlines schools’ obligations under Title VI and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act to ensure meaningful participation by students with limited English proficiency.
Federal law requires schools to take affirmative steps to ensure students with LEP can meaningfully participate in educational programs and services.
These protections were affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lau v. Nichols (1972).
The guidance addresses identification, assessment, language assistance programs, monitoring, and communication with LEP parents.
What the Document Covers
This guidance explains how the FHA applies to digital advertising, including the use of algorithms, automated systems, and artificial intelligence to market housing and credit opportunities.
Advertisers on digital platforms cannot intentionally discriminate on the basis of race or other protected classes under the FHA.
Advertisers can also be liable under the FHA if the advertisement has a discriminatory effect (regardless of intent).
Advertising can violate the FHA by, among other things:
Federal civil rights laws apply to discrimination resulting from the use of artificial intelligence, automated systems, and algorithms — including in employment, housing, and education.
This technical assistance explains how Title VII applies to employers’ use of AI in hiring, promotion, and employment decisions.
Title VII prohibits both intentional discrimination and neutral practices that have unjustified discriminatory effects.
The use of AI to make employment decisions, like whom to hire or fire, can violate Title VII if it has an unjustified discriminatory effect on particular groups.
Employers can be liable for decisions made using AI designed by outside vendors. Employers should talk to their software providers to make sure the AI system complies with the law.
Employers who learn that an AI tool causes discriminatory effects should stop using it or identify less discriminatory alternatives. Otherwise, the employer can be liable.
This guidance explains how employers’ use of AI can violate the ADA.
The ADA’s ban on discriminating against people with disabilities applies to employers’ use of AI tools.
Employers using AI tools can violate the ADA by:
As with Title VII, employers can be liable under the ADA for AI tools developed by outside vendors.
This guidance explains how federal nondiscrimination laws apply to the use of AI in educational settings. The document includes several examples illustrating how the use of AI can create or compound discrimination in schools. For example, a school may be in violation of Title VI if it uses AI facial recognition technology that mistakenly flags Black students as security risks.
Civil rights laws apply to discrimination resulting from the use of AI.
Schools cannot shield themselves from liability by claiming that AI — rather than school officials — caused the discrimination.
This document explains what kinds of workplace conduct constitutes harassment and violates the law.
Federal law prohibits workplace harassment based on race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation; gender identity; and pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions), national origin, disability, age (40 or older), and genetic information (including family medical history).
Workplace harassment can include saying or writing racial slurs; displaying or circulating offensive material, even as a “joke”; mocking someone’s accent or religious garb; groping or touching someone; making sexualized gestures or comments; and other conduct based on race or other protected characteristics.
Workplace harassment violates the law when it involves a change in your employment (being fired, transferred, demoted, etc.) or creates a hostile environment.
Employers are encouraged to have a clear anti-harassment policy, regular harassment trainings, and an effective complaint process for employees.
The information provided herein is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by viewing this information or using the website.
