On November 25, 2025, HUD issued an important policy letter announcing a significant shift in the approach to criminal background screening for HUD-assisted housing. The Department explains that previous guidance caused “confusion” and had a “chilling effect” on owners’ and PHAs’ willingness to enforce safety-related screening and termination policies. In response, HUD has officially rescinded three key guidance documents from 2015, 2016, and 2022 that had limited or discouraged the consideration of certain criminal history information.
HUD’s new message is unmistakably clear: safety is paramount, screening is expected, and owners and PHAs should utilize all tools available under current regulations. The letter emphasizes:
• Mandatory denial categories under 24 CFR 960.204 and 982.553
• Broad discretionary authority to consider criminal activity when determining suitability
• PHA obligations to monitor for ongoing criminal behavior
• The importance of firm, uniform enforcement under “One Strike” principles
• Strong encouragement to review and strengthen existing screening and safety policies
Analysis of the Three Rescinded Documents — and What Their Rescission Means
1. Notice 2015-19 – Limiting Use of Arrest Records
This notice discouraged PHAs and owners from relying on arrest records when making admission or termination decisions, emphasizing the importance of actual conduct and due process.
Impact: PHAs and owners can now consider arrest information as one factor in risk assessment, provided that decisions are reasonable, consistent, and defensible. The rescission removes a previous source of hesitation but does not allow for arbitrary or unfair actions.
2. 2016 OGC Memo – Fair Housing Act Standards for Use of Criminal Records
This memo explained HUD’s previous view on disparate-impact issues and highlighted the risks linked to widespread criminal exclusions.
Impact: Although HUD’s interpretation is rescinded, the Fair Housing Act remains in effect, and disparate impact still applies under federal case law. Screening policies may become more aggressive, but decision-making must remain consistent, justified, and connected to safety-related concerns.
3. 2022 FHEO Memo – Implementation Guidance on the 2016 OGC Standards
This memo further clarified the 2016 guidance, including greater caution and restrictions on the use of criminal history.
Impact: Its removal removes an unnecessary layer of procedural constraints. Owners and PHAs now have greater discretion and fewer bureaucratic steps, as long as they comply with current HUD regulations and basic Fair Housing requirements.
A Reality Check: The Next Administration May Bring the Old Policies Back
HUD openly recognizes that this approach marks a shift from the prior administration’s policy stance. A future administration might reinstate similar guidance. Owners and PHAs should stay adaptable and keep records of policies and decisions, expecting that future changes may again require adjustments.
Practical Recommendations for PHAs and Owners
1. Review and Update Criminal Screening and Termination Policies
Make sure policies align with current regulations, not outdated guidance. Improve criteria when needed, but keep clarity and fairness.
2. Maintain Fair Housing Guardrails
Even without the rescinded guidance, Fair Housing obligations still apply. Avoid blanket bans, make sure decisions are reasonable, and document actions thoroughly.
3. Consider Local Conditions and Property Needs
HUD encourages more vigorous enforcement, but owners and PHAs retain complete discretion. Continue what works; revise what doesn’t.
4. Train Staff Thoroughly
Policies fail without proper implementation. Ensure staff understand mandatory denials, discretionary screening, and the importance of documentation.
5. Remain Flexible for Future Political Shifts
Build adaptable policies so the next change in federal direction doesn’t require a complete policy overhaul.
Conclusion
HUD’s November 25, 2025, letter restores significant discretion to owners and PHAs in conducting criminal background screening and enforcing safety standards. While the rescissions broaden operational flexibility, they do not eliminate Fair Housing requirements or prevent the continued use of more lenient screening approaches. Well-crafted, consistently applied policies remain the best defense—regardless of which way the political pendulum swings. It is essential to recognize that the current Administration is not committed to broad enforcement of federal fair housing law. The next Administration may well reverse that position.