Landlords Ordered to Pay $80,000 for Threatening to Report Tenants to Immigration Authorities
A Cook County Circuit Court judge in Illinois has ruled in favor of former tenants, awarding them $80,000 in damages after their landlords threatened to report them to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during a rent dispute in 2020. The judgment, delivered by Judge Catherine A. Schneider, underscores the protections afforded to immigrant tenants under Illinois law and serves as a warning to landlords who might attempt to exploit tenants’ immigration status.
The lawsuit, filed in 2022 by Maria Maltos Escutia and Gabriel Valdez Garcia against landlords Marco Antonio Contreras and Denise Contreras, was based on the Illinois Immigrant Tenant Protection Act. This law, signed by Governor J.B. Pritzker in 2019, explicitly prohibits landlords from evicting or retaliating against tenants due to their immigration status. The case marks the first successful legal challenge under this law, according to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF).
The tenant couple expressed relief and a sense of justice following the judgment. "We decided not to stay silent because our landlords threatened us with calling immigration, and we do not believe that anyone has a right to threaten us," they stated. "No one should feel or act superior to others. We are all equals and deserve respect. Just because someone is your landlord does not mean that they get to do whatever they want to you."
The legal battle stemmed from a disagreement in June 2020 when Maltos Escutia and Valdez Garcia were in the process of moving out of the basement apartment they had rented from the Contrerases since 2017. The couple had a verbal agreement to pay $600 per month for the space, which included a bedroom, bathroom with shower, living room, and kitchen. Rent was due at the end of the prior month.
As the tenants prepared to vacate, a dispute arose regarding whether they would remain in the apartment for the entire month. The Contrerases allegedly told them they needed to leave because they were selling the house but still demanded a full month’s rent. Maltos Escutia and Valdez Garcia, unsure if they would stay the entire month, requested to pay a prorated amount for the days they occupied the apartment. In response, Marco Antonio Contreras allegedly threatened to call immigration authorities on the family.
Further complicating the situation, after the tenants moved out, Denise Contreras allegedly refused to allow them to retrieve personal belongings, including a stroller, bassinet, baby clothes, and a baby swing, from the attic of the property. The lawsuit did not clarify whether Maltos Escutia and Valdez Garcia ultimately paid rent for their final month in the apartment.
Attorneys for the Contreras family declined to comment on the judgment, citing ongoing matters pending before the judge. However, the $80,000 award was determined based on a combination of assessed damages and penalties.
The Illinois case emerges amidst a broader national debate concerning immigration and the rights of immigrants. The article notes the federal crackdown on cities perceived as "safe havens" for immigrants, referencing actions by former President Donald Trump, such as sending immigrants to Guantanamo Bay and promising mass deportations. It also mentions a visit by Vice President JD Vance to the U.S.-Mexico border, seemingly to reinforce a hard-line stance on immigration.
The article highlights the disparity in legal protections for immigrant tenants across the United States. Only three states – Illinois, California, and Colorado – have explicit protections for immigrant renters. When Governor Pritzker signed the Illinois law in 2019, he emphasized the state’s commitment to "protect our immigrant tenants and give them a little more relief in these tumultuous times."
Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of MALDEF, emphasized the significance of the Illinois judgment as a deterrent to other landlords who might contemplate similar actions. "It’s an important outcome because it’s the first verdict we’re aware of under this law, and we hope it stands as a deterrent to other landlords that might engage in similar conduct," he stated. He also stressed that despite anti-immigrant rhetoric at the national level, state and federal laws still protect immigrants, or those presumed to be immigrants, from discrimination.
Samir Hanna, a former Harvard Law School instructor with the Shriver Center on Poverty Law, echoed this sentiment, arguing that heightened anti-immigrant sentiment makes immigrant legal protections all the more crucial. He explained that without such protections, unscrupulous landlords have increased opportunities for abuse, particularly in the current political climate. He further pointed out the challenges faced by immigrants, especially those who are undocumented, in asserting their rights against landlords, emphasizing the importance of ensuring they are treated fairly and equally. "Immigrants aren’t asking for any special treatment, they’re just asking to be treated like everyone else," he said. "There’s so many times tenants are afraid to enforce their rights in the first place, and undocumented tenants all the more."
The judgment in favor of Maltos Escutia and Valdez Garcia not only provides them with financial compensation but also sends a clear message that threatening tenants with immigration enforcement is unacceptable and illegal in Illinois. The case also puts landlords on notice about the importance of compliance with the Illinois Immigrant Tenant Protection Act. The article is a reminder of the importance of legal safeguards for vulnerable populations and the ongoing need to advocate for fair and equitable treatment for all, regardless of immigration status.
