When Maryland legislators discussed the Fair Chance Housing Act (H.B. 1077/S.B. 514) in 2025, they were not just looking at landlord screening criteria; at the center of the discussion was the value of second chances in our state. The issue was not just a matter of procedures; it was about whether the thousands of individuals in Maryland, disproportionately Black and low-income, who survive incarceration would have a viable chance at rebuilding their lives. Otherwise, without reform, many would continue to face blanket housing denials due to records, all at the expense of reentry efforts and community stability.
This discussion took place against the backdrop of a housing crisis. Maryland must produce 85,000 more rental units for families making less than 30% of the area median income. Roughly 200,000 extremely low-income renter households face an extreme housing shortage, representing only 35 affordable homes for every 100 households. Into this housing crisis enter returning citizens, neighbors, who are faced with nearly total exclusion from housing.
Fair-chance housing would not eliminate background checks; it would simply delay when those checks would be permitted until after a conditional offer was made. Instead, applicants could be evaluated based on their current state, employment, and rental history and character referrals — not automatic denial based on unrelated records of conviction decades prior. This simple change would create a fair chance for people to acquire housing.
Typically, objections to such legislation rest on two arguments. One, that allowing access to people with criminal records somehow puts “law-abiding” citizens at a disadvantage in an overly competitive housing market. Two, that, for safety, we must blanket exclude. Research indicates that housing is one of the most intensive predictors of reentry success. A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report confirmed this. A longitudinal study involving 2,453 probationers, funded by the National Institutes of Health, determined that being unsheltered at the start of probation increased recidivism by 35% while becoming homeless while on probation increased recidivism by 44%, accounting for other variables. Another report found that individuals placed in shelter directly from release were seven times more likely to abscond from parole, compared with housed individuals. The bottom line: Stable housing equals crime prevention. Many cities across America demonstrate proactive polices (such as fair-chance housing laws that prohibit eviction based solely on a record) improve community and reduce recidivism.
In contrast, blanket denials do the opposite: increase homelessness and public expense and destabilize neighborhoods. Those opposed to Maryland’s solution claimed that it “burdens” or “handcuffs” landlords. Landlords still could do their own screening and safety checks and not be held liable for the actions of others. The bill would have just prevented landlords from blanket denying the applicant for a record that was not relevant to tenancy. That was an important distinction. The Urban Institute stated the alternative perfectly: that denying applicants without consideration of risk leads to instability. Maryland’s eviction crisis illustrates why it is significant. Recently, our state’s rate of eviction filings was the highest in the nation, with 92.5 evictions for every 100 renter households. Waiting until families are in eviction court is not prevention. Proactive measures such as fair-chance housing are. And due to disparities in arrest and confinement to pretrial detention rates among Black Marylanders, the criminal record-based housing denials are a form of indirect racial discrimination leading to compounded inequities over generations.
Housing continuity, civic participation, and civic and economic vitality are linked. Individuals with housing continuity are more engaged in voting, community service and investing in their communities, paying rents on time, securing and maintaining jobs, buying groceries, covering transportation and insurance, and utilities. Denying housing is not only denying shelter, but it is also denying a place of belonging to live and access to economic opportunities that support resilient neighborhoods.
Maryland has demonstrated that it can lead. In 2024, Maryland extended a second chance to its parolees when the state eliminated ongoing parole supervision fees and wiped $13 million worth of debt from parolees’ records. This initiative highlighted that punitive financial measures needed to ensure public safety only increased the chances of recidivism. Fair-chance housing would show Maryland’s continued commitment to providing opportunities for those returning.
Finding housing in the community for people with records is not “letting them off the hook.” It is about preventing and ensuring that punishment will not continue to last a lifetime after the sentence is served. Denying housing and stable housing is a key and deliberate policy that contributes to homelessness, crime and disrupts public safety. All communities in Maryland, urban, suburban and rural, have been impacted by incarceration, and the reentry processes to housing are fundamentally connected to social service costs, increased crime and benefits to the local economy. By making no moves to change this (open denial), the state of Maryland is deciding not to stop the costs of instability, fear and waste.
Bipartisanship is an essential area for intervention. A fair chance at housing is a fair chance at a life. Any action, or inaction on this bill, demonstrates the values embedded in socio-political processes. The Maryland General Assembly must legislate again on H.B. 1077/S.B. 514. We cannot afford to ignore dignity, safety or stability.
Antoine Lovell is an assistant professor at Morgan State University’s School of Social Work and a member of the Research Council at the National Alliance to End Homelessness. A formerly homeless youth, his work focuses on homelessness policy, housing justice and inequality. Marquis Howard is a social justice community organizer with BUILD and a graduate of Rutgers University, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in justice studies and a Master of Public Administration.
