Maximize your thought leadership

Minnesota Court Allows Public Housing Civil Rights Case to Proceed Against Minneapolis

By FisherVista

TL;DR

Public housing residents can now leverage this legal victory to demand equal inspection services and hold Minneapolis accountable for decades of neglect.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected immunity claims, finding the city violated ministerial duties by failing to systematically inspect public housing dwellings.

This ruling ensures public housing residents receive equal protection and habitable living conditions, advancing housing justice for vulnerable communities.

A 2025 court opinion overturned 30 years of alleged neglect, granting public housing residents equal inspection rights as private renters.

Found this article helpful?

Share it with your network and spread the knowledge!

Minnesota Court Allows Public Housing Civil Rights Case to Proceed Against Minneapolis

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has cleared the path for a significant civil rights lawsuit against the City of Minneapolis and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority to proceed, rejecting immunity claims that could have ended the case before trial. The August 18, 2025, decision addresses allegations of systemic neglect in public housing inspections and maintenance that plaintiffs claim have persisted for over three decades.

This ruling is crucial because it challenges long-standing practices that allegedly denied public housing residents the same protections afforded to private renters. The case centers on claims that the city violated the Minnesota Human Rights Act by failing to conduct routine inspections of public housing units while performing these inspections for private rental properties. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges MPHA violated various laws by not obtaining required rental licenses and failing to maintain safe, habitable dwellings for residents.

Judge Schmidt, writing for the three-judge panel, emphasized that "The duty to adopt a policy that includes the systematic inspections of all rental dwellings is a ministerial one that the director of regulatory services has violated." The court found that the director of regulatory services is not entitled to official immunity for refusing to enforce city code requirements for MPHA tenants. Regarding MPHA, the court determined that the district court erred in finding no questions of material fact about whether enforcing licensing requirements would have prevented the residents' alleged injuries.

The implications of this decision extend beyond Minneapolis, potentially setting precedent for how public housing authorities nationwide handle inspection and maintenance responsibilities. For public housing residents, this represents a critical step toward ensuring equal treatment under housing laws regardless of income level. The case now returns to the district court where residents will have the opportunity to prove their claims that they were denied basic housing protections available to private renters.

Anna P. Prakash, lead attorney for the residents from Nichols Kaster, PLLP, stated that the opinion removes longstanding excuses for the City's and MPHA's alleged failures regarding licensing and inspections. The lawsuit, filed in September 2021 in Hennepin County, seeks to represent a class of current and former public housing residents who allege they have been subjected to substandard living conditions due to inadequate oversight and enforcement.

Curated from 24-7 Press Release

blockchain registration record for this content
FisherVista

FisherVista

@fishervista