What was the Supreme Court's ruling in 1948 regarding restrictive covenants?
Asked by: Mr. Kole Crona | Last update: January 27, 2026Score: 4.6/5 (6 votes)
In 1948, the Supreme Court case Shelley v. Kraemer ruled that while private racial restrictive covenants aren't inherently illegal, state courts cannot enforce them because doing so violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it constitutes unconstitutional "state action" against people of color. This landmark decision made such discriminatory housing agreements legally unenforceable, significantly impacting civil rights, though private discrimination continued until the Fair Housing Act in 1968.
What was the Supreme Court's ruling on racial covenants in 1948?
Shelley v. Kraemer (1948) is a U.S. Supreme Court case that held that restrictive covenants in real property deeds which prohibited the sale of property to non-Caucasians unconstitutionally violate the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment.
When did restrictive covenants become illegal?
The persistence of racially restrictive covenants symbolized the endurance of racism in housing markets and continued efforts to limit people of color's access to decent housing in desirable neighborhoods. It wasn't until the 1968 Fair Housing Act that racial covenants were made illegal.
Are restrictive covenants still enforceable?
A: No. Although a few states (California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma) have a complete ban on noncompetes, only one state (Minnesota) has enacted a complete ban on noncompetes in the last 80 years. What is true, however, is that states continue to place restrictions on the scope of noncompetes.
What was the Supreme Court's paramount decision of 1948?
In the end, the Court ruled in United States v. Paramount on May 4, 1948, finding that the studios had violated anti-trust laws, in a devastating blow to five major studios and three smaller ones. The case had roots dating back to 1921, when concerns first arose about the studios and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
Making Civil Rights History | The Supreme Court Decision in Shelley v Kraemer
What was the worst Supreme Court decision in American history?
While subjective, Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) is widely considered the worst Supreme Court decision for its role in nationalizing slavery, denying Black people citizenship, and contributing to the Civil War, with other frequently cited poor decisions including Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) (segregation) and Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) (Japanese Internment).
Were restrictive covenants essentially banned after 1948 however?
In 1948, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelley that racially restrictive covenants were unenforceable in court. However, the court preserved the legality of discrimination in private agreements. That wasn't changed until 20 years later when, in 1968, the Fair Housing Act was passed.
How to get around restrictive covenants on property?
Landowners burdened by a restrictive covenant have the option to seek modifications or discharges through the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). This legal avenue is governed by Section 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, which outlines specific conditions that must be met for a successful application.
What did the restrictive covenants ban?
Racially restrictive covenants refer to legal agreements that prohibit the purchase, lease, or occupation of a piece of property by a particular group of people and that prohibit the homeowner from selling or renting to anybody of a specific race or ethnic background.
How is a restrictive covenant different than HOA?
Restrictive covenants are legal agreements that set rules for how you can use, maintain, or modify your property. These covenants often serve as the basis for homeowner association (HOA) rules, which are enforced by community organizations that manage communal facilities and maintain neighborhood aesthetics.
Which restrictive covenant would be considered illegal?
Unlawful restrictions include those restrictions based on age, race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, veteran or military status, national origin, ancestry, genetic information, or source of income as defined in Government ...
What happened on July 2nd, 1964?
President Johnson signs Civil Rights Act. On July 2, 1964, U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson signs into law the historic Civil Rights Act in a nationally televised ceremony at the White House. In the landmark 1954 case Brown v.
What year did segregation actually end?
Signed into law, on July 2, 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed segregation in businesses such as theaters, restaurants, and hotels.
What happened on May 17, 1954?
On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that segregation in public education was unconstitutional, overturning the "separate but equal" doctrine in place since 1896 and sparking massive resistance among white Americans committed to racial inequality.
Who was on the Supreme Court in 1948?
VINSON, CHIEF JUSTICE. HUGO L. BLACK, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE. STANLEY REED, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE.
What happened on June 12, 1967?
In Loving v. Virginia, decided on June 12, 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rules that Virginia's antimiscegenation statutes violate the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment. The decision effectively overturns the bans on interracial marriage in sixteen states.
When did restrictive covenants end?
Kraemer established racially restrictive covenants were unenforceable under the 14th Amendment, the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 made discriminatory covenants illegal and unenforceable.
Are restrictive covenants still legal?
Beginning January 1, 2024, two new California statutes will impose additional limitations on restrictive covenants in employment agreements in the state. Technology companies are no strangers to employee restrictive covenants and ask workers to sign such agreements regularly.
What is the most common restrictive covenant?
One of the most common restrictive covenants is not to do or keep anything on the property that could be a nuisance to the neighbouring properties. This is general covenant that could cover a wide variety of actions, to try to keep the area a pleasant place to live.
What happens if I break a restrictive covenant?
What happens if I breach a restrictive covenant? If you own a property and unknowingly (or otherwise) breach a restrictive covenant then you could be forced to undo any offending work (such as having to pull down an extension), pay a fee (often running into thousands of pounds) or even face legal action.
Is there a way around deed restrictions?
A judge can rule to void the restriction from your deed, or from the common CC&Rs of the association. This is usually very difficult. In most cases, you will have to prove that the HOA does not have the right to enforce the restriction, or that they have not exercised the right.
What can neighborhood covenants restrict you from doing to your home?
Typical limits include restrictions on how many people can occupy the home and the colors you are allowed to paint the exterior. Covenants can also include maintenance you are required to perform. Restrictive covenants are usually enforced by the association's board.
How to find out if your house has a racial covenant?
Although deeds and mortgages today do not contain any illegal discriminatory restrictive covenants, a historical search of a property's chain of titleThe historical record of ownership transfers of a specific piece of property. may uncover restrictive covenants recorded from the 1920s to the 1960s (or even earlier).
Which restrictive covenant is enforceable by law?
In most states, restrictive covenants are enforceable only if they serve a legitimate business purpose and are reasonable in duration, geographic scope and with respect to the substantive nature of the activity being restricted.
What was banned by the Fair housing Act of 1968?
The Fair Housing Act makes it illegal to discriminate against someone because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin or disability at any stage of the mortgage process, including: Approvals and denials. Terms, e.g. interest rates, points, fees and other costs.