Donald Trump, Muslims and Fair Housing.

Buying & Selling Real Estate
10yFollow

Donald Trump, Muslims and Fair Housing.

Russell BrazilBusiness Member
Moderator
Real Estate Agent · Washington, D.C. · Member since 2012 · 17k+ posts · 30k+ votes

First let me start off and say let's not try to let this conversation become a discussion about religion or politics. I know it is impossible to trust a bunch of internet posters to stay on topic, but seriously..let's try to be productive with this conversation. Im not trying to discuss whether you love or hate Donald Trump, or people of a particular religion.

Now I know Donald Trump is quite insulated from his tenants through layers and layers of corporate structure.  But if he were not, what would be the implications of a landlord saying all members of a religion should be banned from entering the country.  It would seem to me that his tenants, particularly if they are a member of that religion could have cause for filing a fair housing complaint. This is to say nothing of the general business practices that it is a good idea to keep certain things private like religion, political affiliation etc.

So what are your thoughts? 

[email protected]301-893-4635Podcast Guest on Show #192
District Invest Group545 Reviews
WebsiteView Page
1Reply
15 views

Most Popular Reply

Rich N.Pro Member
Investor · Haverhill, MA · Member since 2015 · 761 posts · 328 votes
10y

As others have mentioned, he gets away with it because he does not "own" the properties. I bet the properties have all their legal paperwork in place stating they do not discriminate.

We, in general, own our properties, so we would be in court !

2Reply
See this reply in the discussion

16 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Mike CumbieBusiness Member
    REALTOR® · Brockport, NY · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    10y

    HI @Russell Brazil

    I agree with you, that kind of talk may look good on the nightly news and for people sitting around a coffee shop at 6AM before heading off to work, but in business it is a poor choice. I could see someone having a case at a building with his name splattered on the front. He is the brand.

    1Reply
  • Russell BrazilBusiness Member
    Moderator
    OP
    Real Estate Agent · Washington, D.C. · Member since 2012 · 17k+ posts · 30k+ votes
    10y

    @Mike Cumbie Also with as tenant friendly as the NJ and NY courts can be, where he has a lot of properties...Im surprised no one has filed any sort of complaint or action against him.

    [email protected]301-893-4635Podcast Guest on Show #192
    District Invest Group545 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
  • Christopher Lombardi
    Developer · Point Pleasant Beach, NJ · Member since 2015 · 303 posts · 216 votes
    10y

    Any fair housing suit would be tossed unless the complainant can show actual damages.  Saying what he said didn't cause any of his tenants or prospective tenants to suffer a loss.  

    0Reply
  • Russell BrazilBusiness Member
    Moderator
    OP
    Real Estate Agent · Washington, D.C. · Member since 2012 · 17k+ posts · 30k+ votes
    10y

    @Christopher Lombardi A Massachusetts court recently ruled in Linder v. Boston Fair Housing Commission "Despite the fact that Linder’s comment was found to have no discriminatory animus and did not result in discrimination, his inquiry itself is a per se violation of the statute and the regulation." 

    This is an issue that those who dont work full time in the industry I think often dont get, the severity of the interpretation of Fair Housing Laws in the courts, and as regulated by government agencies.  One must not actually show damages, or prove they were discriminated against to win...never mind to even just bring a complaint or suit.

    [email protected]301-893-4635Podcast Guest on Show #192
    District Invest Group545 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
  • Christopher Lombardi
    Developer · Point Pleasant Beach, NJ · Member since 2015 · 303 posts · 216 votes
    10y

    Your right.  That is a very unusual case and seems to be local to MA.  There also seems to be a lot of disagreement with the case, however, and I doubt a ruling like that would hold up in very many places.  

    0Reply
  • Jason Clark
    Real Estate Agent · San Jose, CA · Member since 2015 · 94 posts · 73 votes
    10y

    This seems like a slippery slope. Im not sure where a business owners personal views would cause for litigation towards his business. Many people don't like the personal views held by Chik-fil-a CEO but there is no legal action anybody can take. (Edit: I understand anybody can sue for any reason but Im talking about having an actual case). As a property owner Trump could very well turn the tables and say regardless of his personal views he still rents to those who are Muslim therefore showing no ill intention toward them. Now if he raised their rent or deposit because of their religion then he could be in trouble. Good question though, I hope this thread stays on topic.

    0Reply
  • Mike CumbieBusiness Member
    REALTOR® · Brockport, NY · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    10y

    @Jason Clark,

    Obviously just arm chair lawyering here (I am sure a real one will come in and put me in my place but it is fun to chat nonetheless).

    Chik-fil-a is a company and the CEO is an employee of the board, at what point does that person who is a brand (Trump/Ellen/Oprah etc) no longer be considered the person pushing policy? I am sure in reality he does very little if anything with those properties, even less now that he is in full time campaign mode. However can he still be considered a person who drives the corporate vision?

    0Reply
  • Linda WeygantPro Member
    Investor and CPA · Arvada, CO · Member since 2015 · 2k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    10y

    I think there's a distinct difference between what you say and what you do.  Donald is exercising his free speech (or inciting violence - whichever way you want to look at it) with some of the stuff he says, but as long as he doesn't actually discriminate, then folks would be unable to prove **actual** harm and be unlikely to have a case.

    However, in some cases, there might be a real possible case for people to use issues such as hate speech, hostile working environment (for his employees) or living environment, etc.

    It's less a slippery slope and more of a weird reverse ad hominem (arguments against the person becoming an argument against the brand??) that he sets himself and his companies up for.  

    Podcast Guest on Show #244
    0Reply
  • Rich N.Pro Member
    Investor · Haverhill, MA · Member since 2015 · 761 posts · 328 votes
    10y

    As others have mentioned, he gets away with it because he does not "own" the properties. I bet the properties have all their legal paperwork in place stating they do not discriminate.

    We, in general, own our properties, so we would be in court !

    2Reply
  • M Marie M.
    Rental Property Investor · Washington, DC · Member since 2015 · 278 posts · 156 votes
    10y

    Has anyone forgotten the problem Mr. Trump's statements made about Mexican immigrants for restauranteur Jose Andres?

    The Trump business is changing the Old Post Office Pavilion in DC into a hotel and the plan was to have Jose Andres, who has a bunch restaurants (+1 food truck) in DC to open another restaurant in the hotel. A commercial property thing?

    Well Mr. Trump made his statements about the Mexican immigrants and activist put pressure on Andres to pull out of the deal to open some sort of restaurant. If I remember it correctly, Trump has sued Andres and then Andres counter sued.

    This probably would not have been as much of a problem if Mr. Trump's name wasn't plastered in big honking letters in front of the building, regardless of the fact that it's the business that owns the Post Office Pavilion project.

    1Reply
  • Mike HurneyPro Member
    Real Estate Investor · Boston, MA · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 542 votes
    10y

    @Russell Brazil

    @Christopher Lombardi A Massachusetts court recently ruled in Linder v. Boston Fair Housing Commission "Despite the fact that Linder’s comment was found to have no discriminatory animus and did not result in discrimination, his inquiry itself is a per se violation of the statute and the regulation." 

    If that isn't appealed yet it will be soon!

    Trump? He seems  to be saying things most people are thinking. As far as the last statement on Muslims, who could argue that our broken system should be shut down completely until it's fixed.

    1Reply
  • Jacqueline Carrington
    Investor · Corona, CA · Member since 2014 · 746 posts · 372 votes
    10y

    Freedom of speech.

    Also, if his businesses are not discriminating and following Fair Housing laws, I don't see how or why he could be sued.

    2Reply
  • Russell BrazilBusiness Member
    Moderator
    OP
    Real Estate Agent · Washington, D.C. · Member since 2012 · 17k+ posts · 30k+ votes
    10y
    Originally posted by @Mike Hurney:

    @Russell Brazil

    @Christopher Lombardi A Massachusetts court recently ruled in Linder v. Boston Fair Housing Commission "Despite the fact that Linder’s comment was found to have no discriminatory animus and did not result in discrimination, his inquiry itself is a per se violation of the statute and the regulation." 

    If that isn't appealed yet it will be soon!

    That actually was the ruling in the appeal.  These sort of judgement are actually pretty common against agents, they are just not usually appealed, since the fines are usually about $5,000. So agents typically just pay them and move on. This case was only appealed because of how extraordinary the fines associated with it were.

    [email protected]301-893-4635Podcast Guest on Show #192
    District Invest Group545 Reviews
    WebsiteView Page
    0Reply
  • Mike HurneyPro Member
    Real Estate Investor · Boston, MA · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 542 votes
    10y

    @Russell Brazil WOW!

    I'll ask our Junkyard Dog and Jaimey at MCAD about it!

    1Reply
  • Ndy Onyido
    Toronto, Ontario · Member since 2014 · 615 posts · 172 votes
    10y

    Folks,

    I feel differently about this; 

    1.He has not commited any crime for anyone to sue or file any discrimation case against him;
    2. He has not forced/evicted any tenant from his tenancy; 

    3. He is in America and there is  freedom of speech and he is enttled to his opinion 

    In all these, corporate decisions are not made on the alter of sentiments; there might be an initial sentimental impact on this business, (like some folks here clamoring to change the building in Toronto from "Trump Tower');  but you might be surprised, this might even fuel his business empire.

    He is a smart businessman and rightly knows his business will not descriminate bc it can get sued. Anyone planning to sue him will make him richer!

    I agree with @Jacqueline Carrington

    0Reply
  • Matthew Paul
    Severna Park, MD · Member since 2013 · 7k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    10y

    Trump is entitled to his personal  beliefs and opinions opinions , and others may or may not like it .  As long as they are apart from how he accepts tenants there is no problem .

    The man is sly as a fox , I believe he has spent less , much less than the other candidates , but just by opening his mouth he is on every channel for free . It was once said " there is no thing as bad publicity.

    0Reply
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.
Log InJoin for Free