## Facts

- A nonprofit association sought to open a hospice in Luquillo, Puerto Rico, to house persons in the terminal stages of AIDS; several individuals with AIDS joined as plaintiffs.
- The Puerto Rico agency responsible for zoning and permits denied the association’s application for a special use permit, stating the site was zoned exclusively for agricultural use.
- Plaintiffs alleged the stated zoning basis was a pretext and that the real reason for the denial was community hostility and discrimination against persons with AIDS.
- The court held an evidentiary hearing, reviewed documentary and media evidence, and inspected the site.
- Evidence showed substantial local opposition grounded in fear and moral disapproval of anticipated residents, including misconceptions about AIDS transmission and concerns about property values.
- Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and attorney’s fees under the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, invoking federal-question jurisdiction.

## Issues

1. Whether persons with AIDS qualify as “handicapped” under the Fair Housing Act and therefore receive its protections.
2. Whether the permit denial constituted intentional discrimination under the Fair Housing Act where the asserted zoning rationale was not the actual basis for the decision.
3. Whether a permitting authority violates federal law by denying a permit to satisfy or appease discriminatory community fears and prejudices.

## Decision

- The court ruled for plaintiffs and granted injunctive relief allowing the hospice to operate.
- The court held that persons with AIDS are “handicapped” within the meaning of the Fair Housing Act.
- The court found the agricultural-zoning justification was not a genuine basis for the denial and functioned as a pretext for exclusion.
- The court concluded the agency acted to further, or yield to, discriminatory community pressure directed at people with AIDS, which rendered the official action unlawful under the Fair Housing Act.

## Legal Principles

- Persons with AIDS fall within the Fair Housing Act’s definition of “handicap” when the condition substantially limits major life activities.
- The Fair Housing Act prohibits intentional discrimination in housing-related decisions, including governmental permitting actions that effectively exclude protected persons from residing in a community.
- Government decision-makers may not base official action on, or take action to appease, private parties’ illegal prejudices; doing so taints the action with discriminatory intent even if the officials profess neutrality.
- A stated neutral land-use rationale may establish liability when the evidence shows it was not a real factor in the decision and was used to conceal discriminatory purpose.

## Conclusion

The court enjoined the permit denial for an AIDS hospice, holding that AIDS is a Fair Housing Act-covered handicap and that a permitting authority cannot convert discriminatory community hostility into a zoning decision by invoking a pretextual land-use justification.


Ass’n of Relatives & Friends of AIDS Patients v. Reguls. & Permits Admin., 740 F. Supp. 95 (D.P.R. 1990)