FAQ: About Racially Restrictive Covenants

What are racially restrictive covenants?

A racially restrictive covenant is part of a home’s deed that prohibits people of certain races from buying and occupying property. The following examples of racially restrictive covenants associated with subdivisions illustrate the types of racially restrictive covenants we have identified in our research. See our mapping page for information about the prevalence of the different types of racially restrictive covenants we have found.

Why were racially restrictive covenants written into deeds?

Racially restrictive covenants were one of many racist tools used by white homeowners and developers to ensure that neighborhoods remained segregated. While racial covenants were written into deeds of homes in Washtenaw County as early as 1912, their use became particularly widespread both in Washtenaw County and nationally beginning in the 1920s. Institutions and individuals who wanted to enforce racial segregation saw racial covenants as an alternative to racially restrictive zoning, which the United States Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional in 1917. Unlike racially restrictive zoning ordinances, which were enacted by the government, covenants were seen as private agreements. Both the U.S. Supreme Court (1926) and the Michigan Supreme Court (1922 and 1947) initially held that private individuals could enforce racial covenants in court to prevent people of color from living in their neighborhoods. We are investigating the specific reasons these covenants were used in Washtenaw County, and their role among the various forces and legal instruments that enforced racial segregation, through the Black Washtenaw County Collaborative research project.

Are racially restrictive covenants legal?

Not anymore. In 1948, the United States Supreme Court ruled that courts, as government bodies, could no longer enforce racially restrictive covenants—although the Court did not say they were illegal (Shelley v. Kraemer). Finally, in 1968, Congress passed the Fair Housing Act, outlawing housing discrimination by private parties and making racially restrictive covenants patently illegal.

Although racially restrictive covenants are now illegal, they still exist as part of the deeds to thousands of homes in Washtenaw County. Restrictive covenants “run with the land,” remaining on the title in perpetuity absent legal, legislative, or other action. In other words, a change in ownership of the land or property does not alter existing covenants for the property.

If racially restrictive covenants are unenforceable and illegal, why should we care about them?

Despite the fact that they are not enforceable today, racially restrictive covenants remain on home deeds as repugnant reminders of the blatant racism that characterizes American housing practices and continues into the present day. Justice InDeed believes that it is critical to take action to address racially restrictive covenants because:

1. The covenants cause real harm now. Whenever homebuyers in Washtenaw County read their closing packets, they read that people of color – and sometimes non-Christians – are unwelcome in the neighborhood. It can be jarring and cause stigmatic injury. One local real estate agent told us that she knew of one would-be homebuyer who was so offended by a covenant that, even though it was unenforceable, he refused to close and decided to buy elsewhere. We see these covenants as similar to a “White Christians Only” sign at the entrance to a subdivision today; while such a sign is unenforceable, it would be – and should be – distressing to all who see it.

2. Education about racism begins at home. We think that there is no better way to teach the residents of Washtenaw County of the pervasiveness of white supremacy than to show them the house they live in has a racially restrictive covenant. This knowledge would then serve as an entrée to education about, for example, (a) how covenants denied people of color the opportunity to attain wealth through home ownership, (b) how they deprived people of color the opportunity to live in neighborhoods where their children would go to integrated schools, (c) the role the federal, state and local government played in encouraging racially restrictive covenants and denying mortgages to individuals who lived in areas without the covenants, and (d) the many other racist housing policies that contributed to segregation in Washtenaw County.

3. Education about restrictive covenants should impact current housing policy debates. When setting housing policy today, it is critical to know the history of housing discrimination in Ann Arbor. For example, there are those in Ann Arbor who wish to (1) stop development of new housing projects, (2) maintain one-family housing zoning throughout large parts of the city, and (3) prevent a dedicated source of funding for affordable housing. Policymakers need to understand that racially restrictive covenants and other racist housing policies caused current segregation in the city and how some of these proposals would effectively freeze discrimination in place.

What should be done about them?

Currently, the process of repealing covenants on a home is complex, expensive, and time-consuming. However, with the guidance from our Advisory Board, Justice InDeed is in conversation with community partners about ways to repeal racially restrictive covenants through neighborhood/community organizing, litigation, and/or legislation. Justice InDeed is committed to finding ways to amend the deed and repeal the racial covenants without erasing or “whitewashing” history.

Would repealing the racially restrictive covenant in my neighborhood, or on my house, erase or “whitewash” history?

Absolutely not. Justice InDeed is strongly against erasing the history of discrimination. Under our project, Washtenaw County homeowners do not redact the racially restrictive covenants or physically remove the document from Register of Deeds files. Rather, we file a new amendment document that (1) explains the harm done by racially restrictive covenants, (2) repudiates and repeals the racist restriction, and (3) replaces it with a covenant prohibiting discrimination. So historians researching the chain of title on the property would both see the original language of the racial covenant and the amendment repealing the racially restrictive covenant. Plus, Justice InDeed is mapping all neighborhoods and homes in Washtenaw where racially restrictive covenants existed as a reminder of the pervasive and ugly history of housing discrimination in our county.

Why are there different numbers on the Zooniverse project than on the Justice InDeed website?

We have about 10,000 property records that we’re asking our communities for help with, but the way that Zooniverse works, we can see results faster by uploading them in batches of 500-1000. You can always find our total progress on our Transcribe page.