ACLJ Asks Court To Rule That “Jesus Loves You” Is Not Discriminatory Language in Our Lawsuit Against Virginia Real Estate Board for Targeting Christian Realtor

Previously, we told you about how we filed a lawsuit on behalf of our client, Hadassah Carter. She is a realtor who has been harassed, targeted, and discriminated against by the Virginia Real Estate Board (VREB) for including a Bible verse – John 3:16 – on her website and phrases like “Jesus Loves You” in her email signatures.

We recently filed a motion for summary judgment, which means that we asked the court to declare that the “words and symbols” of Hadassah’s email and advertisement cannot violate the Virginia Fair Housing Act (VFHA) and, therefore, she should be left alone to sell houses and pray in peace.

The issue, in this case, is that the VREB considers the religious “words and symbols” on her email and advertising to be a discriminatory ad in and of itself.

The words and symbols at issue in her email are these:

For Faith and Freedom,
Jesus Loves You, and
With God, all things are possible.

And

My goal is to open the doors to the home of my client’s dreams, and to establish Relationships that will last a lifetime. It is people who are important to me. . . .

God comes first and equal to Him, my Clients come first. I am dedicated to making the dreams of families come true across the State of Virginia, and those relocating around the World. I am dedicated with true devotion to serving GOD and helping people. My commitment is to every client as well as to my fellow REALTORS, in providing the highest standards of excellence, integrity, loyalty and professionalism. I operate on the principles of the “Golden Rule”, in providing the most professional Real Estate services available. I am thankful for the trust that my clients put in me. My highest compliment is when a client refers their family and friends to me for the same service that I have given to them!

And her personal statement:

“For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

I am available to you when you need me!

As for her advertisement, it has John 3:16 and includes many flags in addition to the Stars and Stripes, such as the Japanese, Mexican, and Mozambique flags.

The VREB actually thinks that John 3:16 and the words above can violate the Virginia Fair Housing Act because they indicate a preference to sell or rent based on religion. In short, the VREB is engaging in discrimination in order to prevent discrimination. The logic escapes me.

Never mind free speech rights or free exercise rights or (because a presumption is involved) due process rights. Somebody might feel discriminated against, and therefore, she cannot talk about her faith.

The brief in support of our motion for summary judgment makes two arguments based on free speech and a third based on due process.

This case involves an absurd presumption, which is that using such expressions of faith is essentially proof she would discriminate against people of other faiths. This straw man fallacy runs squarely against the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. As we explained to the court:

[T]he literal meaning of the presumption is applicable in detrimental ways to the purposes of the VFHA and minorities.

So, while no one may advertise for tenants who speak a particular language, Holmgren v. Little Vill. Cmty. Reporter, 342 F. Supp. 512 (N.D. Ill. 1971) (Violation of FHA prohibition on discrimination by national origin to advertise for Spanish speaking tenants), under the presumption, the agent cannot advertise that he or she speaks Spanish. The words “Se habla espanol,” are associated with Hispanic national origin, thus, a real estate agent is presumed to have indicated a preference for Spanish speakers even though all the agent has done is announce that he or she speaks Spanish and provides a service that some consumers want.

This would be wholly absurd, yet it’s exactly what’s happening here but in relation to faith. The due process argument rests on the constitutional requirement that for an evidentiary presumption to be constitutional (a presumption means that if certain facts are true, then other facts may be presumed to be true), there must be a “rational connection” between the facts proven and the facts presumed.

For example, a common presumption is that someone who has an unexplained possession of recently stolen goods is the person who also stole the goods.

In our argument, we pointed out the absurdity of the idea that religious words and symbols mean discrimination by saying:

The underlying logic of the presumption—that to say A excludes B—is false. “[T]he same words are often capable of different meanings according to their collocation and connections.” Senger v. Senger’s Ex’r, 81 Va. 687, 698 (1886). Thus, an email with the tagline: Jane Doe, Attorney at Law, does not mean that Jane Doe will only serve attorneys. If anything, it implies that she will provide legal services to non-lawyers.

The same holds true with a real estate agent. The signature: Hadassah Carter, Real Estate Agent, does not mean that she will only provide services to other real estate agents, nor does, Hadassah Carter, Real Estate Agent, John 3:16; imply that she will provide service only to people named John.

The VREB has already tried to have our case thrown out of court, but we prevailed; and now we are asking the court to rule for our client against this absurd presumption being leveled against her. As we’ve previously explained:

These complaints [against our client] are wrong, not only morally, but legally wrong too. They are legally wrong because our Fair Housing laws prohibit discriminatory ads. So, for example, you cannot say “House for rent to women only” or “One bedroom apartment for men only” but you can say “House for Rent. Perfect for Large Family.” or “One bedroom apartment. Perfect for Singles.” It’s obvious which of these examples shows discriminatory intent.

But, how does saying, “I’m a Christian realtor” indicate discrimination? It doesn’t. Continuing its denial of reality, the Left argues that it does. This is like arguing that “up” is “down” and “down” is “up,” a ridiculous argument but now being used in a terrible way. Hadassah stood to lose her job because a government agency didn’t want to follow the law.

To make matters worse, it is the Virginia state agency that is claiming religious discrimination, turning logic on its head. There are no actual complaints against Hadassah for any discrimination. She has a diverse clientele of Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Kenyans, and Vietnamese. Not a single allegation of religious discrimination was made against her.

In fact, she was actually taking action to try to defend one of her clients from discrimination in an actual fair housing dispute when the government first targeted her. The agency saw Hadassah’s email signature and decided to take action against her instead. It’s shocking.

We will continue battling to defend Hadassah and all people of faith from this kind of outrageous government discrimination. The VREB’s brief is not due for a while, but we will keep you informed as our ongoing case in defense of Hadassah continues. Keep us and her in your prayers.