EstatePass
Practice Of Real EstateFair_housingHARD

A Minnesota landlord owns a duplex and lives in one unit. She refuses to rent the other unit to an unmarried couple, citing her sincere religious beliefs. The couple files a complaint with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, alleging discrimination based on marital status. The landlord argues that her religious freedom protects her from liability. Under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, which outcome is most likely?

Correct Answer

C) The landlord may be found in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, as marital status is a protected class and the Act's religious exemptions are narrow and do not broadly protect individual landlords.

Marital status is a protected class under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minn. Stat. Ch. 363A). While the Act contains some religious organization exemptions — primarily for nonprofit religious organizations that own property used for religious purposes — these exemptions are narrow and do not broadly protect individual private landlords who happen to hold religious beliefs. A private landlord who refuses to rent based on marital status is generally subject to the Act. Minnesota courts have addressed the tension between religious freedom claims and the MHRA's anti-discrimination provisions, and the landlord's religious beliefs do not automatically provide a complete defense in this context.

Answer Options
A
The landlord is exempt because owner-occupants of duplexes are fully exempt from the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
B
The landlord's religious beliefs provide a complete defense, as the First Amendment supersedes the Minnesota Human Rights Act in this context.
C
The landlord may be found in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, as marital status is a protected class and the Act's religious exemptions are narrow and do not broadly protect individual landlords.
D
The landlord is not in violation because the Minnesota Human Rights Act's marital status protection does not apply to owner-occupied residential rental properties.

Why This Is the Correct Answer

Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Why the Other Options Are Wrong

Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Deep Analysis of This Practice Of Real Estate Question

Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Background Knowledge for Practice Of Real Estate

Sign up free to unlock full analysis
Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Real World Application in Practice Of Real Estate

Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Common Mistakes to Avoid on Practice Of Real Estate Questions

Sign up free to unlock full analysis

Related Topics & Key Terms

Key Terms:

minnesota_human_rights_actmarital_statusreligious_exemptionowner_occupantfair_housingexpert_trap

Related Concepts

Broker supervision is the legal obligation of a designated or managing broker to oversee and be accountable for the real estate activities of all salespersons and associate brokers operating under their license.

Commingling is the illegal act of mixing client funds with a broker's personal or business operating funds, while conversion is the unauthorized use of client funds for the broker's own benefit. Both are serious violations that can result in license revocation.

Commingling is the illegal act of mixing client trust funds with a broker's personal or business operating funds; conversion is the misappropriation of those funds.

Was this explanation helpful?

More Practice Of Real Estate Questions

People Also Study

Related Articles

Practice More Questions

Access 2,000+ practice questions and pass your real estate exam.

Start Practicing