28. A widower wants to rent an apartment in an 80-unit, 4-building apartment complex, where rent is subsidized by HUD. The widower's son has been diagnosed with AIDS and will live in the apartment. The landlord refuses to rent to the widower. Which of the following is true?
Answer: A
This is a violation of the 1988 amendments to the federal Fair Housing Act.
The refusal to rent to the widower constitutes a violation of the 1988 amendments to the federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in housing based on disability, among other factors. Since the widower's son has been diagnosed with AIDS, this situation falls under the protections afforded to individuals with disabilities.
A) This is a violation of the 1988 amendments to the federal Fair Housing Act.
This option is correct because the 1988 amendments expanded the definition of discrimination to include individuals with disabilities, which encompasses those with AIDS. Denying housing access to a tenant based on their association with a person with a disability is explicitly prohibited under this law.
B) This is a violation because the apartment complex was financed by HUD.
While the involvement of HUD may influence the housing policies and adherence to fair housing laws, the key issue here is the discrimination based on disability. Thus, this option is not entirely accurate as it does not directly address the specific protections granted under the Fair Housing Act amendments.
C) The landlord can legally refuse to rent to the widower because people with AIDS are not part of a protected class.
This option is incorrect because individuals with AIDS are indeed considered part of a protected class under the Fair Housing Act. The law explicitly includes individuals with disabilities, and AIDS qualifies as a disability under this designation.
D) The landlord can legally refuse to rent to the widower in the interest of the other tenants in the apartment complex.
This statement is incorrect as it suggests that the landlord's decision is justified by the interests of other tenants. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination regardless of the perceived interests of other tenants, making this rationale invalid in light of the protections for individuals with disabilities.
Conclusion
The correct answer, A, is definitive because it aligns with the protections established by the 1988 amendments to the Fair Housing Act regarding discrimination based on disability. All other options fail to correctly interpret the law or misrepresent the protections afforded to individuals with disabilities, particularly in relation to housing discrimination.