California Fair Housing Law — FEHA & the 2 CCR Housing Regulations

The housing half of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) lives in Government Code § 12955, which lists the specific practices that are unlawful — refusing to rent or sell, discriminatory advertising, discriminatory financing terms, retaliation, and discriminatory land-use decisions, among others — and the characteristics those practices cannot turn on. The California Civil Rights Department has also adopted detailed regulations at Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, §§ 12005 through 12162, which define terms, set out the two different legal theories a fair-housing claim can proceed under, and describe specific prohibited conduct in advertising, harassment, retaliation, and land use.

This page is a map of that structure rather than a full restatement of every regulation. GoCodebook can quote any individual section's exact text and check how it applies to a specific fact pattern.

Section 12955 makes it unlawful for the owner of a housing accommodation to discriminate against or harass any person, or to make a discriminatory written or oral inquiry, because of race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, or genetic information. It separately reaches financial institutions providing assistance for the purchase, refinance, or construction of housing; real-estate-related transactions and appraisals; and access to multiple listing services or brokerage organizations.

Two definitions matter for scope. First, under 2 CCR § 12005, an "aggrieved person" is anyone who believes they have been injured — or are about to be injured — by a discriminatory housing practice, and "adverse action" is defined broadly, covering things like refusing to rent, reducing services, filing false reports with tenant-screening agencies, or refusing a reasonable accommodation. Second, § 12955(m) states that each protected characteristic in the statute includes a perception that a person has that characteristic, or that the person is associated with someone who does.

The regulations recognize two separate ways a housing practice can be unlawful. Under 2 CCR §§ 12040–12042, a practice is intentional discrimination when any protected characteristic is a "motivating factor" in an adverse action — the complainant does not need to prove personal prejudice or animus, only that the protected characteristic was a motivating factor. Intent can be shown by direct evidence (an explicit condition or stated bias) or by indirect/circumstantial evidence through a burden-shifting process, and once intentional discrimination is shown through direct evidence, no affirmative defense is available except for a facially discriminatory policy meeting a narrow two-part test.

Under 2 CCR §§ 12060–12063, a practice can also be unlawful without any discriminatory intent if it has a discriminatory effect — it actually or predictably results in a disparate impact on a protected class, or creates or reinforces segregated housing patterns. A practice with a discriminatory effect can still be lawful if the respondent proves a "legally sufficient justification" (§ 12062): the practice must be necessary to a substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest, must effectively carry out that interest, and there must be no feasible less-discriminatory alternative. Critically, § 12063 states that a legally sufficient justification is never a defense to a claim of intentional discrimination.

Under 2 CCR § 12050, it is unlawful to make, print, or publish any notice, statement, or advertisement regarding the sale or rental of housing that indicates a preference or limitation based on a protected characteristic — including electronic advertisements on housing platforms, websites, or social media — and this applies even if the housing itself would otherwise be exempt from the Act. Section 12051 carves out narrow exceptions, such as inquiries about the source or level of income permitted under § 12141(b), or age-based preferences for qualifying senior housing under Government Code § 12955.9.

2 CCR § 12120 defines housing harassment as either quid pro quo harassment (submission to an unwelcome demand made a condition of housing) or hostile environment harassment (unwelcome conduct severe or pervasive enough to interfere with the use or enjoyment of a dwelling), judged from the perspective of a reasonable person in the aggrieved person's position. 2 CCR § 12130 separately prohibits retaliation against anyone who engages in a "protected activity" — filing a complaint, opposing a practice believed discriminatory, or requesting a reasonable accommodation — and lets an aggrieved person raise retaliation as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action without delaying that action.

Fair housing rules also reach public and private land-use practices. Under 2 CCR § 12161, it is unlawful for a public or private land-use practice to intentionally discriminate, or to have a discriminatory effect without a legally sufficient justification, in connection with housing opportunities — including denying land-use benefits, imposing different requirements than generally applied, using or approving restrictive covenants, or providing inadequate municipal infrastructure or services (water, sewer, code enforcement) in a discriminatory manner. 2 CCR § 12162 adds specific unlawful practices, including requiring eviction based on broad "nuisance" definitions that treat a call to law enforcement or emergency services as grounds for action, and practices tied to immigration-status enforcement (with an exemption for activities required by federal law or court order).

Residential real-estate-related transactions get their own effect-based rule at 2 CCR § 12155: making a transaction unavailable, imposing different terms, providing inaccurate information, or using different creditworthiness criteria are each prohibited if they produce a discriminatory effect based on a protected class, absent a legally sufficient justification — and they are separately prohibited outright if they intentionally discriminate.

Several fair-housing questions come up often enough that they have their own dedicated pages: source-of-income discrimination (housing vouchers and other income sources), assistance animals in rental housing, reasonable accommodation requests, and criminal-history screening rules. This page is the map; those pages go deeper on each specific rule.