MINNEAPOLIS, MN – U.S. Senator Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chair of the Senate Housing Subcommittee, sent a letter to the Department of Justice urging them to address the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in eviction filings. The letter comes on the heels of a Minnesota lawsuit against a firm whose automated eviction filing system may have violated federal law by enabling them to file thousands of complaints without adequate investigation or accuracy controls, leading to wrongful evictions. Automated tools also allow corporate landlords to file serial evictions as a means of collecting rent, placing significant legal burdens on renters. Minnesota renters have reported paying hundreds of dollars in court fees and still having evictions on their record, making it even harder to repay their late rent or find more affordable housing.
“Evictions have lasting, detrimental impacts on a family’s housing stability and overall well-being. Following an eviction, families are more likely to experience homelessness, a loss of earnings, lower credit scores, hospital visits, and mental-health concerns,” wrote Senator Smith. “While I recognize and appreciate the potential for these technologies to reduce bias, in this application, I remain concerned about a disparate impact of serial eviction filings, along with limited accountability for errors in automated eviction processes and the lack of recourse for tenants. […] I encourage the Civil Rights Division to apply their holistic approach to enforcement, education, interagency coordination, and policy to prevent unfair and erroneous evictions.”
“Eviction actions haunt renters for many years, making it difficult, if not impossible, for them to secure quality, stable, affordable housing in the future,” said Eric Hauge, Executive Director with HOME Line, a Minnesota tenant advocacy nonprofit. “With landlords filing evictions at record levels the past couple of years and in the midst of an extremely tight rental market for affordable units, automating this already accelerated process using error-prone AI technologies, rather than simply reaching out to renters to talk through payment disagreements, is severe and unwarranted.”
“Automation of the eviction process takes away the human element and removes any sense of accountability for errors. That many of these filings are based on inaccurate information does not remove the harm that is experienced by renters and the disruption of having to show up in court, sometimes multiple times, to fight against claims with no merit. Some renters feel like they can’t afford to take the time from work and family to challenge these actions because they feel like they can never get a fair shake in a court process that feels stacked against them,” said Housing Justice Center, a nonprofit aimed at preserving and expanding access to affordable housing. “Our system of justice needs to be better than that.”
While these tools are often touted for their potential to be unbiased, they may actually be creating new challenges that threaten equitable access to housing, especially when finding safe and affordable housing is already a significant struggle. The use of automation in eviction filings, in particular, raises critical issues of fairness and accountability. Without proper oversight, these systems risk amplifying existing inequalities, leading to unjust outcomes for vulnerable populations.” said Kirstin Burch, Program Director for Family Housing Fund. “It is imperative that we scrutinize these technologies to ensure they serve justice, not just efficiency. We fully support efforts to interrogate these systems to ensure they uphold fair housing practices and do not create additional barriers.”
Senator Smith led a subcommittee hearing in January of this year focusing on the role of AI in housing. During that hearing, Senators discussed the promise and peril of AI in housing and the importance of responsible implementation with housing experts. You can view and download Senator Smith’s opening remarks from the hearing here.
Full text of the letter to the Department of Justice can be found here or below.
—
The Honorable Kristen Clarke
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Assistant Attorney General Clarke,
I am deeply concerned about the rise of corporate landlords using automated technologies to file serial and sometimes erroneous evictions, intensifying housing insecurity across Minnesota and nationwide. For that reason, I write to call your attention to a concerning trend of automated eviction filings, many of which are using artificial intelligence. These practices, which were raised in a hearing at the Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development earlier this year, could be violations of federal civil rights law. I appreciated your leadership of the recent interagency convening on Advancing Equity in Artificial Intelligence, and I hope you will look into this emerging practice along with the other AI-related issues your Division is reviewing.
The affordable housing crisis in this country has intensified the eviction crisis. The United States has the highest rate of evictions among OECD countries and double the rate of evictions of most other countries. Eviction filings affect 7.6 million Americans a year and there was a 10.5 percent increase in filings between 2022-2023. These filings disproportionately impact Black renters, women, and families with children. Women account for 60 percent of eviction filings and while roughly one-fifth of renters are Black, Black Americans receive over half of all eviction filings.
Evictions have lasting, detrimental impacts on a family’s housing stability and overall well-being. Following an eviction, families are more likely to experience homelessness, a loss of earnings, lower credit scores, hospital visits, and mental-health concerns. Mothers who experience eviction report more parenting stress, negative health outcomes for their family, material hardship, and higher rates of depression. For children, experiencing eviction is associated with adverse outcomes affecting their academic performance and cognitive and socio-emotional development. This is especially concerning as childhood is the most common age to experience eviction in the United States.
Increasingly, and especially among corporate property management companies, landlords appear to be engaging in serial eviction filing as a means of rent collection and using the court as a first rather than a last resort. These serial eviction filings are often enabled by automated services, or “one-click-eviction” software such as Nationwide Evictions, ClickNotices, CaseAct, Connect2Court, and EasyEviction. Large landlords file evictions at two to three times the rate of smaller landlords and these eviction filings are often over less money owned. When tenants who are even just days behind on their rent are threatened with an eviction filing, they have to pay on average $180 in court fines and late fees, increasing their housing cost burden. Renters in Minnesota have reported paying over $400 in court fees and still having evictions on their record, making it even harder to repay their late rent or find more affordable housing. Eviction filings hinder a family’s ability to find future housing, especially when automated tenant screening services may flag these filings for landlords with errors, little context, and regardless of if the eviction was enacted or not.
For landlords, these tools accelerate and automate evictions while depersonalizing the process. Some automated eviction technology companies argue they are upholding the Fair Housing Act by treating all tenants equally, thus reducing the opportunity for landlord bias to create disparate impacts. While I recognize and appreciate the potential for these technologies to reduce bias, in this application, I remain concerned about a disparate impact of serial eviction filings, along with limited accountability for errors in automated eviction processes and the lack of recourse for tenants. The legal system is often inaccessible and overburdensome for tenants facing eviction: only 3 percent of tenants have legal representation in eviction proceedings compared to 80percent of landlords. This tenant disadvantage is amplified by eviction courts that often have complex, confusing, and inconsistent rules and processes. Automated eviction filings have the potential to further strain overburdened eviction courts, intensifying the disadvantage for unrepresented tenants.
Automated technologies have made errors in eviction filings and have potential for bias. In Minnesota, a lawsuit was filed against a law firm that advertised its ability to “automate” the eviction process and enable landlords to file evictions faster. The case asserted violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act based on an automated eviction filing system, which allegedly enabled the defendant to file thousands of complaints without adequate investigation or accuracy controls. The defendant had to change their practices and provide monetary relief and expungements for impacted renters. In Los Angeles, a law firm specializing in mass evictions allegedly used a generative large language model in a filing which cited incorrect and fictious cases. Another concerning use of these technologies is in facial recognition and biometric detection cameras, which have been shown to have tremendous potential for racial bias, being placed in buildings to detect lease violations and facilitate evictions.
You may recall the rampant, abusive practice of “robo-signing” that upended the mortgage market around the 2008 financial crisis. We shouldn’t allow a similar rush toward automation to now undermine longstanding protections against wrongful eviction filings. The burden to combat unjust evictions should not be solely on renters. I appreciate the Civil Rights Division’s commitment to holding entities accountable for discriminatory outcomes from artificial intelligence, algorithms, and automated decision-making tools. I encourage the Civil Rights Division to apply their holistic approach to enforcement, education, interagency coordination, and policy to prevent unfair and erroneous evictions.
Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to working with you to strengthen protection of the rights of our nation’s renters.
Sincerely,
Tina Smith
Chair
Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development
###
English