Skip to main content

Restrictive Covenants

Discriminatory restrictive covenants spread throughout the United States in the early twentieth century. Discriminatory restrictive covenants were intended to prevent people of color from moving into certain neighborhoods. Although they are now illegal and unenforceable, some properties may still include discriminatory covenants in their historical record.

This page provides resources regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants on real estate, what they mean, and what property owners can do about them.

A restrictive covenant is a provision on a Deed, Mortgage, or other recorded instrument that regulates the ownership or use of a parcel of real estate.

No, lawful uses of restrictive covenants include land use restrictions such as maintaining land for public parks or nature preserves, or permitting only single-family homes, or prohibiting industrial activities on the land.

Discriminatory restrictive covenants are clauses that prohibit the ownership, occupancy, or use of land based upon a particular trait, such as race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), family status, disability, or other protected classes.

Generally, yes. Since the United States Supreme Court’s 1948 decision in the case Shelley v. Kraemer, restrictive covenants based on race have been unenforceableA contract will not be enforced by a court of law..

Although deeds and mortgages today do not contain any illegal discriminatory restrictive covenants, a historical search of a property’s chain of titleThe historical record of ownership transfers of a specific piece of property. may uncover restrictive covenants recorded from the 1920s to the 1960s (or even earlier).

Every county or town’s recorder of deeds office is open to the public for research into the history of every parcel of land in that county.  Many counties, including many of the most populous counties in the country, have made their records available online.  However, online records may not be comprehensive, and may only cover the past few decades.  There are “mapping” projects underway in parts of the country to search for discriminatory restrictive covenants.  Some of these projects are:

There is a patchwork of laws across the United States addressing the legacy of discriminatory restrictive covenants. The states listed below have adopted laws that make it easier to record documents to modify or remove discriminatory restrictive covenants from historical recorded documents such as deeds and mortgages. In other states, a court action might be necessary to obtain a judge’s order removing the discriminatory restrictive covenant. You may need to consult an attorney familiar with real estate records. Please remember that discriminatory restrictive covenants based on race, religion, national origin or sex are illegal and unenforceable. There is no obligation to remove the discriminatory restrictive covenant in order for all homeowners to enjoy the ownership and use of their properties regardless of their race, religion, national origin, or sex.

al ak az ar ca co ct dc de fl ga hi id il in ia ks ky la me ma mi md mn mt mo ms ne nv nh nj ny nc nd nm oh ok or pa ri sc sd tn tx ut vt va wa wv wi wy
Alabama has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Alaska has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Arkansas has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Ark. Code Ann. §16-123-206 and 16-123-210 declares void any restrictive covenant based on race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or familial status, and voids most restrictive covenants based on religion.
Arizona has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
California has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Cal Gov Code § 12956.2, effective 7/1/22, provides that any discriminatory covenant can be removed by filing a statutory “Restrictive Covenant Modification” form for a fee not to exceed $2. The law also requires all copies of deeds be accompanied by a notice that the RCM process exists. Also, any title company or escrow agent who becomes aware of a discriminatory covenant must notify the buyer and help them with the RCM process. The RCM process includes a referral to the county attorney, who must determine within 3 months if the language to be removed is improper. Each County recorder is also required to develop plans to proactively identify unlawful restrictive covenants.
Colorado has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. C.R.S. §24-34-501 declares void any restrictive covenant limiting the transfer, rental, or lease of any housing because of disability, race, creed, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, familial status, national origin, ancestry, or veteran or military status, or limiting the rental or lease of any housing because of source of income. C.R.S. §38-30-169 provides a process for removing discriminatory restrictive covenants after judicial determination and in connection with transfers of real estate.
Connecticut has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-12a and 47-12b provide that unlawful restrictive covenants (limited to race-based restrictions) are void and a property owner can file an affidavit or other form with the town clerk calling out the restrictive covenant and declaring it void. No fee to record. The law also permits condo owners to require their boards to hold meetings and determine whether to remove unlawful restrictive covenants from deeds, declarations and by-laws.
District of Columbia has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. D.C. Code §42-407 prohibits the recordation of any document containing a discriminatory restrictive covenant.
Delaware has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. 9 Del.Code §9628 provides a process for owners of real estate to request that the county recorder of deeds remove the discriminatory restrictive covenant from recorded instruments, which requires review by the County attorney.
Florida has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Fla. Stat. Ann. §712.065 declares discriminatory restrictive covenants to be void, and provides that a property association can remove discriminatory restrictive covenants from the land upon vote of a majority of the association’s board of directors
Georgia has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Ga. Code Ann. §44-5-60 declares restrictive covenants based on race, creed, color, age, sex, or national origin to be void.
Hawaii has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Haw. Rev. Stat §515-6 declares restrictive covenants based on race, sex, including gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, color, religion, marital status, familial status, ancestry, disability, age, or human immunodeficiency virus infection to be void. Such discriminatory restrictive covenants cannot be included in any recorded instrument.
Idaho has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Idaho Code §55-616 voids discriminatory covenants and authorizes owners and tenants to file a restrictive covenant modification document with the county clerk, at no charge. The effect of the modification document is to strike the offending language from the original document.
Illinois has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. 55 ILCS 5/3-5048 permits any property owner to file a petition and a modification of an unlawful restrictive covenant with the recorder of deeds; the petition gets sent to the County State’s Attorney. The State’s Attorney then has 30 days to review the petition and ensure that the language sought to be modified is indeed unlawful, and that only the unlawful restrictive covenant is being removed. If approved, the modification is recorded in the real property records. The county recorder’s fee for this modification cannot exceed $10.
Indiana has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Ind. Code §32-21-15-2 permits property owners to file statements in a recorded instrument that a prior discriminatory restrictive covenant is invalid.
Iowa has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Kansas has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Kentucky has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Louisiana has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Maine has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Me. Stat title 33 §121 and 124 provide that an affordable housing covenant cannot include a restriction on the sale of residential real estate based on race.
Maryland has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Real Property Code §3-112 bars restrictive covenants based on race, religion or national origin, and permits a property owner or an HOA to record a “restrictive covenant modification” that re-records the original document with the offending language removed. The restrictive covenant modification then gets referred to the county attorney to determine if the covenant is unlawful and the modification removes only the offending language. Only after the county attorney’s review will the modification be recorded.
Massachusetts has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Mass. Gen. laws ch.184 §23B declares All provisions and covenants restricting real property based on race, color, religion, national origin or sex to be void, except in a limited nature on the use of real property for religious organizations.
Michigan has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Mich. Comp. Laws §37.2505 declares void any restrictive covenant based on religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, familial status, or marital status, except in a limited nature based on the use of real property for religious organizations. Michigan also bars the inclusion of such restrictive covenants in any recorded instrument.
Minnesota has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Minn. Stat. §507.18 outlaws restrictive covenants and permits owners of interests in land to record a statutory form that “discharges and releases from the land” any restrictive covenants at no cost to land owners.
Mississippi has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Missouri has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Mo. Rev. Stat. §442.403 declares void and unenforceable all restrictive covenants based on race color, religion, or national origin that are attached to property.
Montana has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Mont. Code Ann. §49-2-305 makes it illegal to refuse to sell or rent any real property to another person based on sex, marital status, race, creed, religion, color, age, familial status, physical or mental disability, or national origin.
Nebraska has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Neb. Rev. Stat. §20-318 provides that it is unlawful to refuse to sell or rent any real property to another person because of race, color, religion, national origin, disability, familial status, or sex.
Nevada has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. §111.237 and 111.2375 provide that any restriction regarding race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, familial status, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression imposed on real property, including covenants, is void and unenforceable. Owners of land subject to such restrictive covenant may file a form to remove the limitation.
New Hampshire has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §354-A:13 provides that any discriminatory restrictive covenant regarding real property is void, and individuals attempting to assert such a covenant could be liable for a civil rights violation. A limited exception exists on the use of real property for religious organizations.
New Jersey has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. N.J. Stat. Ann. §46:3-23 provides that discriminatory restrictive covenants can be removed by the property owner by recording a “Certificate of Release of Certain Prohibited Covenants.” The statute provides the form for this Certificate, and no fee for filing the Certificate. The law also requires HOAs to find and remove any discriminatory provisions from their operative documents.
New Mexico has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. N.M. Ann. §28-1-7 makes it unlawful to discriminate in the sale or lease of real property based on a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, childbirth or condition related to pregnancy or childbirth, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap.
New York has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. NY CLS Gen. Oblig. §5-331 declares discriminatory restrictive covenants based on race, creed, color, national origin, or ancestry to be void and unenforceable.
North Carolina has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
North Dakota has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Ohio has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. ORC Ann. §5301.05 provides that discriminatory restrictive covenants are void, and such covenants may be excluded from subsequent deeds and other instruments.
Oklahoma has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. 25 Okl. Stat. §1452 provides that it is unlawful to refusal to sell or lease real property to a person because of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, familial status, or disability or to include in any instrument a restrictive covenant based on such characteristics.
Oregon has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. §93.270 and 93.274 declare restrictive covenants by reason of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin or disability to be unlawful, and provide a procedure for the removal of discriminatory restrictive covenants from recorded instruments.
Pennsylvania has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Rhode Island has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
South Carolina has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
South Dakota has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Tennessee has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Tenn. Code Ann. §4-21-604 provides that restrictive covenants based on race, color, creed, religion, sex or national origin are void.
Texas has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Tex. Prop. Code §202.004 bars homeowners associations from enforcing discriminatory restrictive covenants, and §5.0261 further provides that an owner of real property can file a motion in the district court where the property is located, at no cost, which motion should be ruled upon within 15 days. The Court’s determination is then sent to the county clerk and recorded in the county’s real property records.
Utah has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. Utah Code Ann. §57-21-6.1 declares restrictive covenants based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, source of income, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity to be void.
Vermont has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Virginia has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Va. Code Ann. §36-96.6 provides that any restrictive covenant based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, elderliness, familial status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, or disability to be void. §55.1-300.1 further provides that any discriminatory restrictive covenant can be released by the owner of the property by recording a Certificate of Release of Certain Prohibited Covenants.
Washington has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Rev. Code Wash. §49.60.227 permits land owners to record at no cost a restrictive covenant modification document that identifies the offending document and “strikes” all unenforceable provisions from the original document.
West Virginia has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants. W.Va. Code §36-4-18 declares any restrictive covenant based on race, color, religion, ancestry, sex, familial status, blindness, handicap or national origin to be invalid and unenforceable.
Wisconsin has no identified applicable state statute regarding discriminatory restrictive covenants.
Wyoming has a statute voiding discriminatory restrictive covenants and providing a procedure for removing them from the real property records. Wyo. Stat. §34-1-154 permits property owners, attorneys, and title companies to record a new instrument to remove any unenforceable restrictive covenant. The law provides a process for people who claim the removed covenant was enforceable, and benefitted by that covenant, to challenge the removal.