Cohabitating Americans in 7 states run afoul of the law

[sonicx]

The almost 1 million unmarried heterosexual Americans who live together in Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia are violating state laws against "lewd and lascivious" cohabitation.

Such laws are remnants of an earlier era; North Carolina's is vintage 1805. And although they remain on the books, anti-cohabitation laws are rarely enforced.

But a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of North Carolina's statute is making its way through the courts and is drawing new attention to these old laws.

"The idea that government criminalizes people's choice to live together out of wedlock in this day and age defies logic and common sense," says Jennifer Rudinger, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, which filed suit on behalf of Debora Hobbs.

snip

"The public perception is that people who live together who are not married who have intimate relations are violating the cohabitation law," says Kent Willis, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia. He says the laws usually are not prosecuted, but challenges come up when they are cited by landlords as a reason for not renting to cohabiting couples or by government agencies refusing licenses.

more = http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/2005-07-17-state-law_x.htm

[tritsofme]

1. I've heard of college towns in IL

using cohabitation laws as a way to stop college students from buying houses in the residential areas of town.

[IndianaGreen]

2. This issue can be used to gather support for marriage rights for gays

The fact that the same pukes that are against full rights for GLBTs are also going after hetero couples that don't subscribe to their sexual mores.

[Wabbajack]

3. Why don't the stupid

state legislatures take the five minutes to repeal the laws?

[Mairead]

4. Because it's in the interests of the powerful to have many such laws

so that they can be used as weapons. Even when they're not enforced, they're enforced.

[rodeodance]

5. there was a sheriff who recently used a law such as this to fire two

employees--he said it was immoral and unlawful that they live together. Laws such as this are dangerous.

[Mairead]

13. Dangerous indeed. Also disgusting.

[Bo]

21. Very true mairead....the police state marches on

[MountainLaurel]

14. Virginia is too busy

Trying to outlaw baggy pants and to mandate that women report their miscarriages to the police. Meanwhile, the West Virginia legislature is figuring out how they can maximize support for coal companies, chicken farms, and other corporations raping the state.

[Wabbajack]

15. Ban baggy pants?

Just damn.

[MountainLaurel]

16. Yep

The bill didn't make it out of committee, but the fact that someone brought it forward at a time when the state is falling apart is appalling.

[0007]

20. .....baggy underpants will be a hard to outlaw, 'eh?

[bleedingheart]

22. what is worse....Spandex for everyone!!! No baggy pants...BUT

my eyes!!!!! just shoot me now....hahahhaha

[northzax]

32. it wasn't baggy pants

it was the showing of underwear.

[free_spirit82]

25. Why do they want women to report their miscarriages to the police? n/t

[MountainLaurel]

28. Here are the full details

http://democracyforvirginia.typepad.com/democracy_for_virginia/2005/01/legislative_sen.html

It is already a requirement in Virginia that health care providers report ALL fetal deaths. This law was to include women who don't see a health care provider at all, requiring them to report the "fetal death" to authorities within 12 hours.

[free_spirit82]

39. OMG!

That is sick!! I glad I didn't live in VA when I had my miscarriage. I didn't even know I had miscarried until the day after when I went back in for a follow-up checkup. That nut should be institutionalized for acute stupidity.

[MountainLaurel]

41. They're striving for "A Handmaid's Tale"

Fundies like this are just another little step toward taking reproductive control away from women.

[llmart]

6. Oh, my.......

I'll have to let the elderly couple (they're in their mid-70's) that live across the street from me know about this law. Oh, yeah, and they're the ones with the "I Support Bush" bumper stickers on their vehicles. My, my. Such hypocrisy from the Repugs. They've been living together for at least 15 years that I know of and I'm in Michigan.

[Ian David]

7. You can file a civilian criminal complaint at the courthouse

Drag their bushie asses in front of a a magistrate.

[yardwork]

43. LOL! It's often older people who decide not to get married again

and live together. They don't want to risk losing their assets - plenty of older folks decide to live together without getting married.

I'll bet a pretty high percentage of them are chimpy supporters. How ironic.

[HockeyMom]

47. NJ Domestic Partnership Law

includes heterosexuals couples over the age of 62 to sign up as Domestic Partners. You just answered the reason why.

[lapislzi]

8. Some sheriff in New Mexico...

made national news about this awhile back. He was in Las Cruces, I think.

Seems he made it his personal business to bust college students who were "cohabiting."

Just another republican crotch-doggy.

You know the kind; they can't help sticking their noses into your crotch to find out what you've been up to.

I need that bumper sticker: Republicans - making government just small enough to fit in your bedroom.

[Rich Hunt]

9. wow

Michigan??

[Obamarama]

10. ENFORCE IT!!! PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE!

[dArKeR]

11. This is a job for Whoreland Security!

http://elitetorrents.org/

[BiggJawn]

12. "Rarely enforced"....Unless you're GAY!

Which is exactly why they leave these laws on the books. They could give a shit if a man and a woman are shackin' up, but if it's 2 GUYS.....

[dsc]

17. actually gays are exempt from those laws

as you have to be opposite sex for them to cover you.

[BiggJawn]

18. You sure about that?

Exempt, or just not addressed? There IS a difference.

[dsc]

19. The discussion of the NC law in the media

given the lawsuit mentioned upthread, has mentioned a man and a woman living together. Remember we also had a sodomy law here and that covered gays and lesbians.

[JusticeForAll]

23. I would bet dsc is right that it only applies to men and women

Any type of roommate arrangements would be impossible, otherwise.

neat thread...go ACLU!

[BiggJawn]

44. I'll take youse guys word for it.

Since you're closer to it than I am...

still, if it's only enforcable on STR8's why do they keep it around? Surely not just to hassle a dispatcher who refuses to blow the Sheriff...

[noonwitch]

24. Landlords should have the right to deny housing to unmarried straights

I don't think there should be any kind of criminal aspect, but I do think that an individual property owner should be free to deny renting to unmarried straight couples. It's that person's property, after all.

It would be impossible to enforce against gays, and on top of that, gays aren't allowed to get married, so it would be further discrimination. But really, how many of us straight people have had same-sex roommates over the years, especially during and right after college? No one would know if it was a gay relationship, if the couple was discreet.

I don't think straight couples who live together should get each other's benefits at their employer's expense. They have the option of getting married.

[Heddi]

26. what about roommates? Siblings?

There are more than sex-based opposite sex cohabitants living together. A friend of mine and her brother live together. Had to go through hurdles (in south carolina) to prove to the landlord they were bro and sis (last names were different) and not people shacking up.

Are people not allowed to have roommates anymore? Or they must be same-sex roommates?

And it's just as discriminatory to deny same-sex couples to live together as it is to deny opposite-sex couples to live together. The landlord has no place to concern him or herself with my marriage plans or the people I choose to live with.

If I am in a studio apartment that, by law, cannot house more than 1 person, then that's one situation. But if i'm renting a 1bedroom apartment, and I and the person I choose to have live with me both pass the credit & reference checks, pay our rent on time, and don't cause any problems or damage the property, then what the hell right does the landlord have to say "Well, you're not married, and you're a woman and he's a man. No go". Fuck that.

And yes, straight couples (that aren't roommates or siblings) have the OPTION to get married, but many don't CHOOSE to get married. And that is perfectly their right, and should not be a contingent that someone must meet in order to rent a house or apartment with another person.

According to you "I do think that an individual property owner should be free to deny renting to unmarried straight couples. It's that person's property, after all". Then fine--they could equally deny renting to same-sex married but mixed race couples as well. Or mixed religious marriages, right? It's their property, afterall.

This is stupid. My husband and I lived together for 3 years before we got married. At one point, we had a male roommate--which would have been fine in your eyes as long as I wasn't living in the property.

It's none of the landlord's (or government's) business who I choose to live with, and under what kind of relationship I choose.

[northzax]

33. siblings are acceptable

in every state there is an exemption for family. It is, in fact, the landlord's interest in having a stable tenant situation.

[Heddi]

34. why does being unmmaried equal unstable?

Again--my husband and I lived together without the benefit of marriage for three years.

I know a couple who are opposed to marriage (because of their belief that it's discriminatory against gays). They're straight, and have lived togheter unmarried for close to 30 years.

All antecdotal, of course, but I know MORE married couples who had police called on them, evicted for noise, damage, fighting, etc than I do single but cohabitating couples living together.

I think that marriage makes, for some people, MORE instability because it's not like a divorce is cheap and easy to get. If you're just living together, and you want to break up, you just do. You don't have to divide property the way you do with marriage.

There is no proof that unmarried but cohabitating couples are any more 'unstable' than married couples are 'stable' or that either one has a higher record of evictions or landlord-tenant disputes than the other.

[northzax]

35. and I will cite my anecdotal evidence

I know only one couple who lived together for longer than one year without getting married who successfully made 5. And I've seen some ugly incidents involving apartments that were being cohabited.

[Heddi]

38. at any rate, denying rentals to unmarried couples is against the law

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/yourrights.cfm

The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.
What Is Prohibited?

In the Sale and Rental of Housing: No one may take any of the following actions based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap:

* Refuse to rent or sell housing
* Refuse to negotiate for housing
* Make housing unavailable
* Deny a dwelling
* Set different terms, conditions or privileges for sale or rental of a dwelling
* Provide different housing services or facilities
* Falsely deny that housing is available for inspection, sale, or rental
* For profit, persuade owners to sell or rent (blockbusting) or
* Deny anyone access to or membership in a facility or service (such as a multiple listing service) related to the sale or rental of housing.

In Addition: It is illegal for anyone to:

* Threaten, coerce, intimidate or interfere with anyone exercising a fair housing right or assisting others who exercise that right
* Advertise or make any statement that indicates a limitation or preference based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or handicap. This prohibition against discriminatory advertising applies to single-family and owner-occupied housing that is otherwise exempt from the Fair Housing Act.

---
Denying non-married couples the right to cohabitate is illegal, according to HUD, because it discrminates according to 'familal status'.

Unless, of course, you're arguing that there should be NO anti-discrminatory laws wrt housing, and that landlords can refuse to rent to anyone. I mean, it's their property--they should have the right not to have black people live there. Or women. Or the disabled.


--On edit:

Unless the provision against familial status refers to not being able to deny people with children from living in an establishemnt. I'm not sure of their definition of 'familial status'

[northzax]

40. I believe the original intent of the law

was your latter interpretation, avoiding discrimination against people with children. indeed, HUD's own interpretation of this section is:

Housing Opportunities for Families

Unless a building or community qualifies as housing for older persons, it may not discriminate based on familial status. That is, it may not discriminate against families in which one or more children under 18 live with:

* A parent
* A person who has legal custody of the child or children or
* The designee of the parent or legal custodian, with the parent or custodian's written permission.

Familial status protection also applies to pregnant women and anyone securing legal custody of a child under 18.

Exemption: Housing for older persons is exempt from the prohibition against familial status discrimination if:

* The HUD Secretary has determined that it is specifically designed for and occupied by elderly persons under a Federal, State or local government program or
* It is occupied solely by persons who are 62 or older or
* It houses at least one person who is 55 or older in at least 80 percent of the occupied units, and adheres to a policy that demonstrates an intent to house persons who are 55 or older.

A transition period permits residents on or before September 13, 1988, to continue living in the housing, regardless of their age, without interfering with the exemption.

[HockeyMom]

48. Two exceptions to all that

First is if the owner lives in the single family house and is just renting out a room or two. Then they can pretty much say who they want to live with them. It is almost like advertising for a roommate.

As far as families with children, housing specifically designed for people over a certain age (Seniors) can refuse to rent to people under that age or those with children under a certain age.

[skygazer]

29. ?????

Why? Why should a landlord be able to deny an unmarried couple the right to rent a place? Why is it any of the landlord's business if they're sleeping together or if they are simply friends and roommates which you don't seem to think occurs? If they are not engaging in criminal activity (and you say yourself that you don't think there should be a criminal aspect) then why should they be discriminated against? What about inter-racial couples? Should landlords be able to deny housing to inter-racial couples because it offends them? Do you see the can of worms this opens?

[noonwitch]

50. If the landlord feels this is immoral

He will feel that he is contributing to the immorality by enabling an unmarried couple to live together. I personally don't agree with his attitude, but he should have the freedom.

Who would want to rent from somebody with this attitude, when there are plenty of landlords who are just in it for the money and don't care about your personal life? Or buy a house, so no one can tell you who can live there? It's better for your financial security, if you can.

I actually think for gay couples, buying a house together does help provide at least some legal protection, in that you are bound together in the contract and if the couple were to split up, their would have to be a financial arrangement made regarding that house. Since we don't have gay marriage or "civil unions"....

[northzax]

51. and that it has not been held to violate federal law

state law or the Constitution. The FHA lists the restrictions that you cannot impose on tenents, anything else is fair game. If I only want to rent my apartment to redheads, that's my choice. But I can't limit it to Jewish redheads. it's silly to deprive yourself of potential tenants, but whatever, there's nothing in the Constitution saying you can't deprive yourself of revenue.

[skygazer]

52. There are still plenty of people who think interracial relationships

are immoral. Or inter-religious. Should they have the right to refuse to rent to those couples, married or not? Why or why not?

Why would I want to rent from someone with that attitude? What, you think there are suitable rentals just popping out of the woodwork? For plenty of people, their choices are limited economically or in terms of locality or just plain availability - not every town or city has a plethora of rentals - it's very difficult to find them in some areas, particularly affordable ones. And surprise, surprise, not everyone can afford to buy a house.

Your logic is faulty and opens up an extremely slippery slope. It is not rational to allow a landlord's moral values to influence who they will or won't rent to - if a person is not committing any criminal act, then what they do in their bedroom is none of their landlord's business. Period. That is simply discrimination, pure and simple.

[54anickel]

30. Heh, I'm reminded of a quote by Miss Piggy,

"one need not be married to achieve status".

Guess she'll need to amend that to add, "but benefits - well that's another story".

[SemperEadem]

31. I think the landlord REALLY has nothing else going in their life

if they're taking time out to ascertain if the couple paying the rent on time is a: married and b: having sex.

The only thing they should be concerned about is that the property is maintainted and the rent check cashes. That's it. Anything else is a matter of being a control freak.

I'd rather have an unmarried couple paying rent on time and keeping up the property than to have a married couple destroying the property and are late every month on the rent.

And the marriage thing is a choice, not a prerequisite or an order. No one should get married if they don't want to be married. It's no one's place to force marriage upon a couple that doesn't want to.

[Cornczech]

49. I had a landlord in Utah

who stated that he would ONLY rent to my boyfriend and I if we got married. (This was about 1991, 1992 in Salt Lake City when it wa still predominately Mormon...)We were shocked! We ended up finding a better place, but imagine the look on our faces when he said, show me a marriage certificate and I'll be GLAD to rent to you......

[Qanisqineq]

27. Cohabitation laws -- how ridiculous

If it's not hurting anyone, then leave them alone. I've lived in two of these states (North Dakota and Virginia) and was cohabiting with a boyfriend in each one. Actually, I'm a serial cohabitor (prior to getting married), I cohabited with a series of boyfriends in North Dakota. Is there a special law against serial cohabitors? What is the punishment for cohabiting?

Hey, on Little House on the Prairie I saw adult men and women cohabiting. They weren't sleeping in the same bed... as far as we know... but supposedly doing so to help support a widow and her children. Is that against the law? Gosh, what a highly immoral television show. :eyes:

[Darwins Finch]

36. What about Common Law?

I grew up in Virginia and occassionally heard of "common law marriage", wherein two people who lived together could be considered married after a certain number of years.

I guess that was either a myth, or the current laws prohibiting cohabitation have put the kibbosh on that one.

[Solon]

37. Hey, that would seem wierd...

I hope there is no such law in Missouri, my best friend and I are not the same sex, and we lived together for 2 years about a year ago, no sexual relations because she's a lesbian, but it was a 2 bedroom apartment for crying out loud, I better look this shit up.

[Jack_DeLeon]

45. Common Law Marriages exist in Texas, and some other states.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cyf/commonlaw.htm

You have to live together and you have to tell others that you are married.

[Darwins Finch]

46. So, not in Virginia

Thanks for the info! The whole concept is much clearer now.

:hi:

[camero]

42. Reminds me of the Kinsey report

That which classified 95% of men as so sexually wild that they could be classified as "outlaws" under state laws. It begs the question of a state having so much power over personal lives as to make 90+% of its people outlaws and the sense of those laws.

Of course, these laws are enforced more often under repube administrations, thus showing that repubs just snoop in the bedroom and ignore the boardroom, where lots of thefts from society take place.