Stacy E. Seicshnaydre
The Supreme Court has held that the language of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) is “broad and inclusive,” and the Court has given it a broad construction. Correspondingly, the traditional interpretive canons suggest that courts must construe exceptions narrowly. However, some courts have restricted coverage under the FHA by broadly reading an exception or by inferring an exception.
The Essay provides several illustrations of this practice and argues against inferred statutory exemptions to the FHA, at least for courts that otherwise adopt a strict textualist approach to statutory construction.