Connecticut Fair Housing Protections for Crime Survivors 2025

Sections 2 through 15 of Public Act 25-139 amend Connecticut's existing fair housing statutes to add two new protected categories: victim of sexual assault, and victim of trafficking in persons. These join the list already covered under Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c, which governs discriminatory housing practices statewide.

[Cite: Public Act 25-139, sections 2-15, amending Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

This isn't a standalone survivor-housing statute. It works by inserting these two categories into the existing fair housing framework, which means the same prohibited conduct, exemptions, and enforcement mechanism that already govern discrimination based on race, sex, or the other listed categories now apply equally to these two new ones.

Because this amendment works through the existing statute, the prohibited conduct list is the same one that's applied to every other protected class for years. It's worth restating in full since it now applies to these two categories as well: refusing to sell or rent a dwelling after a bona fide offer, discriminating in the terms, conditions, or privileges of a sale or rental, publishing a notice or advertisement indicating a discriminatory preference, misrepresenting whether a dwelling is available, steering an applicant away from certain properties based on their protected status, and discriminating in real estate transactions or in access to multiple-listing services.

[Cite: Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

For a landlord's screening process specifically, the practical implication is direct: a rental decision can't be influenced by learning that an applicant is a survivor of sexual assault or human trafficking, whether that information comes up through a background check, a reference, or something the applicant discloses directly.

Unlike some protected categories that are visually apparent, survivor status typically only becomes known to a landlord through something specific: a police report referenced in a background check, a request for a reasonable accommodation tied to safety concerns, a reference from a shelter or victim services organization, or the applicant disclosing it directly, sometimes in the context of explaining a prior eviction or address history connected to fleeing an unsafe situation.

[Cite: Public Act 25-139, sections 2-15]

That distinction matters operationally. A landlord doesn't need to proactively screen for this status, and shouldn't; the statute's concern is with how that information, if and when it does surface, factors into a housing decision.

The statute carries forward the same narrow exemption that applies to Connecticut's other fair housing protections. It doesn't apply to the rental of a room in a single-family dwelling where the owner actually maintains and occupies part of the living quarters as their residence, or to part of a two-family dwelling where the owner occupies the other unit as their residence.

[Cite: Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

This is a narrow carve-out, not a broad small-landlord exemption. It's specifically tied to the owner actually living in the same building, not simply owning a small number of units elsewhere. A landlord who owns a duplex but doesn't live in either unit doesn't qualify for this exemption.

A violation of this statute is a class D misdemeanor. That's a criminal classification, not merely a civil fine, which puts fair housing violations involving these two new protected classes on the same footing as violations involving any of Connecticut's other long-standing protected categories.

[Cite: Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

For a property management company, this raises the stakes above what a purely civil penalty structure would carry. It's also a reason to treat training on these two new categories with the same seriousness as training on Connecticut's existing fair housing protections, rather than as a minor addendum.

Enforcement runs through the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the same state agency that already handles fair housing complaints involving Connecticut's other protected classes. A person who believes they were discriminated against on the basis of sexual assault or trafficking victim status files a complaint with CHRO through the same process used for any other fair housing claim.

[Cite: Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

That existing infrastructure is part of why this amendment was structured as an addition to the current statute rather than as a new, separate law. CHRO doesn't need a new complaint process or investigative framework; it applies the one already in place to these two additional categories.

The same broader legislative package that produced this housing amendment also included employment protections for sexual assault and trafficking victims, covering leave from work for medical care, counseling, safety planning, and legal proceedings. That employment provision is a separate part of the same underlying bill, governed by different statutory sections, and shouldn't be confused with the housing discrimination protections described here. A property management company operating as an employer, not just a landlord, may have separate compliance obligations under that employment-focused provision.

[Cite: Public Act 25-139, sections 2-15]

Connecticut's fair housing statute has expanded its list of protected categories over time, domestic violence victim status and lawful source of income are both relatively recent additions compared to the original core categories. Adding sexual assault and trafficking victim status continues that pattern, extending the same underlying protections to survivors whose housing stability is often directly connected to their safety.

[Cite: Connecticut General Statutes section 46a-64c]

For a property manager already familiar with how the domestic violence victim protected class works in practice, since screening, documentation, and confidentiality practices are often similar, that existing framework offers a useful starting point for handling these two newer categories consistently.

The practical starting point is updating fair housing training materials and screening policies to explicitly name these two new protected categories, rather than assuming general fair housing training already covers them by implication. Staff involved in application review, background check evaluation, and tenant communications should know that a background check result or disclosure revealing survivor status can't factor into a housing decision, the same way a background check revealing a person's race or religion couldn't.

Given the misdemeanor classification, it's also worth reviewing how sensitive information that surfaces during screening, such as a police report or a reference from a victim services organization, is documented and handled internally, to avoid a situation where that information inadvertently shapes a decision even without explicit intent to discriminate.