×
AI discrimination lawsuit reaches $40M settlement
Written by
Published on
Join our daily newsletter for breaking news, product launches and deals, research breakdowns, and other industry-leading AI coverage
Join Now

The growing use of AI algorithms in tenant screening has come under legal scrutiny, highlighted by a groundbreaking class action lawsuit settlement that addresses potential discrimination in automated rental application decisions.

The case background: A federal judge approved a $2.2 million settlement in a class action lawsuit against SafeRent Solutions, led by Mary Louis, a Black woman who was denied housing through an algorithmic screening process.

  • Louis received a rejection email citing a “third-party service” denial, despite having 16 years of positive rental history and a housing voucher
  • The lawsuit challenged SafeRent’s algorithm for allegedly discriminating based on race and income
  • The company denied any wrongdoing but agreed to settle to avoid prolonged litigation

Key allegations: The lawsuit identified specific components of SafeRent’s screening algorithm that potentially perpetuated housing discrimination against minority and low-income applicants.

  • The algorithm failed to consider housing vouchers as a reliable source of rental payment
  • Heavy reliance on credit scores disproportionately impacted Black and Hispanic applicants due to historically lower median credit scores
  • The automated system provided no meaningful appeals process for rejected applicants

Settlement terms: The agreement includes both monetary compensation and significant changes to SafeRent’s screening practices.

  • The company will pay over $2.2 million in damages
  • SafeRent must remove its scoring feature for applications involving housing vouchers
  • Any new screening score development requires validation from a third party approved by the plaintiffs

Broader implications: The settlement represents a significant precedent for AI accountability in housing discrimination cases.

  • The Department of Justice supported the plaintiff’s position that algorithmic screening services can be held liable for discrimination
  • Legal experts note that property managers can no longer assume automated screening systems are inherently reliable or immune to challenge
  • The case highlights how AI systems can perpetuate discrimination even without explicit programming bias, through the data they use and weight

Regulatory landscape: The intersection of AI decision-making and discrimination remains largely unregulated despite widespread use across various sectors.

  • AI systems are increasingly involved in consequential decisions about employment, lending, and healthcare
  • State-level attempts to regulate AI screening systems have generally failed to gain sufficient support
  • Legal challenges like this case are helping establish frameworks for AI accountability in the absence of comprehensive regulation

Looking ahead: This landmark settlement could catalyze increased scrutiny of automated decision-making systems across various industries, potentially spurring both legislative action and additional legal challenges to address algorithmic bias in high-stakes decisions affecting vulnerable populations.

Class action lawsuit on AI-related discrimination reaches final settlement

Recent News

Companies hide AI job cuts behind vague “tech update” language

Companies disguise AI-driven job cuts behind vague "technological updates" to avoid scrutiny.

Grok tops AI benchmarks even as xAI faces antisemitic controversy

Making chatbots "think" a certain way remains an unsolved problem across the industry.

Microsoft commits $4B to train 20M people in AI skills globally

The tech giant balances AI ambitions with workforce concerns amid recent layoffs.