... which results in illegals being able to rent property as I said was the case.
SCOTUS recently denied cert in Villas of Parkside v. Farmers Branch which left in place the 5th Circuit's opinion:
We conclude that the ordinance’s sole purpose is not to regulate housing but to exclude undocumented aliens, specifically Latinos, from the City of Farmers Branch and that it is an impermissible regulation of immigration. We hold that the ordinance is unconstitutional and presents an obstacle to federal authority on immigration and the conduct of foreign affairs.Back to the NY case ... I linked to it to point out the following section:
Do Illegal Aliens Have the Right to Rent an Apartment?My original statement was, "Illegal aliens are permitted by federal law to own and rent property." Until SCOTUS says local ordinaces can ban illegals from renting property or the Feds enforce immigration law, that statement is correct because permission is granted "in effect."A recent case decided in the Supreme Court in New York County, Recalde v. BAE Cleaners, Inc., affirms the right of an illegal alien to obtain an apartment and not be subjected to an inquiry by a landlord to verify “a tenant’s immigration status….” The Court found that there was no Federal or New York legal precedent which “prohibits a landlord from renting an apartment to a tenant who lacks legal immigration status.”
Not surprising to see SCOTUS kick that back. Between the parts of Arizona SB1070 they struck down and upholding Arizona Workers Act, they’ve provided a roadmap for crafting local law.
Your RECALDE quote again is not from the case itself. It’s paraphrased. The actual text paints a somewhat different picture. I’d also argue granting a preliminary injunction is not the same thing as a “decided” case.