Question 21

A complainant in a discrimination case under the Federal Fair Housing Act must prove only that discrimination occurred.

A complainant is required to demonstrate that discrimination took place, without needing to provide evidence of intent or provocation by the accused party.

A) only that discrimination occurred.

This option is correct because under the Federal Fair Housing Act, a complainant needs to establish that discriminatory practices have occurred. The law does not require the complainant to prove any additional elements such as intent or provocation.

B) that discrimination occurred and was not provoked.

This option is incorrect as it implies that the complainant must show that the discrimination was not provoked, which is not a requirement under the Federal Fair Housing Act. The focus is solely on whether discrimination took place, regardless of the circumstances surrounding it.

C) that the accused party intended to discriminate.

This option is incorrect because the Federal Fair Housing Act does not require proof of intent to discriminate. The law is concerned with the act of discrimination itself, and whether it occurred is sufficient for a complainant's case.

D) that damages occurred.

This option is incorrect as the complainant does not need to prove that damages occurred in order to establish a case of discrimination under the Federal Fair Housing Act. The presence of discriminatory actions alone is sufficient to meet the burden of proof.

Conclusion

The requirement for a complainant in a discrimination case under the Federal Fair Housing Act is clearly defined as proving that discrimination occurred, making option A the only correct choice. Other options fail because they introduce unnecessary conditions such as proof of intent, provocation, or damages, which are not mandated by the Act. This distinction is crucial for understanding the legal framework surrounding discrimination in housing.