When state and federal fair housing laws conflict, follow the more restrictive rule to protect age as a protected class

When state and federal fair housing laws collide, how should a real estate professional respond? The short answer is simple, but the implications are practical and important: you follow the more restrictive law. This isn’t just a rule tucked away in a dusty code book. It’s a practical safeguard that protects clients and keeps your transactions compliant across jurisdictions.

Let me explain what “more restrictive” means in real life, especially around age as a protected class.

A quick map of protections: federal baseline, state embellishments

Think of federal law as a floor. The Fair Housing Act provides a broad, nationwide standard designed to prevent discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and familial status. Age isn’t one of the protected classes under the core federal act itself. That’s why in some conversations you’ll hear that age discrimination isn’t addressed by FHA in a broad sense.

States, however, don’t have to stop at the federal floor. They can—and often do—raise the protection level. Some states and localities expressly protect age, or add rules that limit how age can be used in housing decisions. In practice, that means:

• You may encounter age as a protected class under state or local law.

• State provisions can add thresholds or carve-outs that don’t exist at the federal level.

• When a state statute or local ordinance goes further than federal law, the state or local rule takes precedence in that jurisdiction.

So, if Katrina is operating in a state that adds age protections, her obligation isn’t “federal-only.” She must follow the state rule, too, and in cases of conflict, the stricter rule wins.

A concrete way to think about it

Here’s a mental model you can carry into any transaction: rulebooks stack like layers of protection. The foundation is federal. The next layer is state. The top layer—where it exists—comes from city or county ordinances. If two layers clash, you pick the one that offers the tighter protection for people. If a state says, “No age discrimination beyond what the federal law allows,” but another local rule adds stronger age protections, you follow the stricter local rule in that area.

In the question you’re likely considering, Katrina is navigating “age as a protected class.” The correct approach isn’t to ignore federal guidance or to pretend state law isn’t real. It’s to apply the stricter standard, if the state adds extra protections around age. That approach keeps everyone safer and reduces the risk of a complaint, settlement, or worse.

What does this look like in practice? A scenario you can picture

Imagine Katrina is advising a rental applicant and discovers two conflicting signals:

• The federal rule gives her a baseline that doesn’t expressly shield against age discrimination.

• The state rule, on the other hand, says the same decision cannot discriminate on the basis of age, or it imposes additional safeguards around age-related preferences.

In that moment, Katrina should follow the state rule. If the state law says you cannot discriminate based on age beyond certain limits, she applies that limit to the screening, the advertising, and the lease process. The federal baseline isn’t discarded; it simply isn’t the controlling rule where the state provides more protection.

The practical steps Katrina can take

If you’re in a role like Katrina’s, here’s a straightforward checklist you can adapt:

• Listen for the cue: Notice if a state or local law mentions age in the context of housing protections. This is your warning flag that a stricter rule may be in effect.

• Check both layers: Look up the federal Fair Housing Act and then review state civil rights statutes and local housing ordinances. Many jurisdictions publish guidance for licensees and practitioners; HUD resources are a solid starting point for federal baseline understanding.

• Compare the protections: If the state law protects age or imposes age-related limits that are stricter than federal standards, treat that state rule as your governing standard in that jurisdiction.

• Apply consistently: Once you determine the stricter rule, apply it consistently across all steps—advertising, screening criteria, lease terms, and accommodations.

• Document decisions: Keep notes about which rule you followed and why. Documentation can be a lifesaver if questions arise later.

• Seek counsel when in doubt: If a situation feels murky, don’t guess. A quick consult with a compliance advisor or attorney who specializes in fair housing can prevent problems down the road.

• Use reliable resources: HUD.gov, state civil rights commissions, and your local housing authority are excellent sources for current laws and updates. These aren’t just academic references—these are practical tools you can use every day.

Why this matters beyond the letter of the law

You might wonder, does this really affect everyday transactions? Absolutely. When you follow the stricter standard, you’re not only reducing risk of liability—you’re building trust with clients who depend on you to treat everyone fairly. Fair housing isn’t just about avoiding lawsuits; it’s about ensuring people have genuine access to housing opportunities, no matter where they live within their state or community. That trust translates to smoother negotiations, fewer conflicts, and a reputation for integrity that pays dividends in the long run.

A few quick things to keep in mind

• The baseline rules aren’t the whole story. Federal protections are broad, but states can offer more. You’re doing your job when you harmonize your practice with the strongest applicable rule.

• Age protections can appear in surprising places. Some cities or counties add protections that aren’t obvious at first glance, so don’t assume it stops at the state level.

• Language matters. When you draft or review advertising or screening criteria, phrasing can make a big difference. Avoid language that could be construed as excluding based on age, even indirectly.

• Training helps. Regular updates on fair housing rules—especially in your state—keep you sharp and reduce the chance of missteps when laws shift.

The big picture: fairness as a guiding principle

This isn’t just a legal footnote. It’s a reflection of how housing markets should work: everyone, regardless of age, should have a fair chance to participate in housing opportunities. When state and federal laws align to protect more people, it’s a win for communities, for homeowners, and for professionals who want to do right by their clients.

A tiny detour you might appreciate

If you’ve ever wondered why these differences exist, here’s a simple analogy. Think of federal policy as a nationwide safety net. It catches a lot of people, but some states knit in extra patches to cover additional risks that the federal net doesn’t fully address. The result isn’t about favoring one set of rules over another; it’s about delivering the strongest protection where it’s needed most. That’s exactly what following the more restrictive law achieves in the context of age and fair housing.

In sum: the correct approach, applied with clarity and care

When Katrina faces a scenario where state and federal fair housing laws conflict about age as a protected class, the best move is clear: follow the more restrictive law. This approach ensures compliance, demonstrates a commitment to fair housing principles, and reduces the likelihood of legal complications down the line. It’s a practical, principled stance that supports both clients and professionals as they navigate the real estate landscape.

If you want a reliable starting point for staying on the right side of the law, keep these touchpoints handy:

• Federal baseline: Fair Housing Act provisions

• State statutes and local ordinances addressing age protections

• HUD guidance and state civil rights bodies for updates

• A clear internal policy that explicitly recognizes when state rules trump federal ones

With that framework, you’ll move through day-to-day decisions with confidence, accuracy, and a touch of steadiness that clients notice—and appreciate.