Click here to read about Bill No. 5347
Written Testimony Submitted to the Connecticut General Assembly Housing Committee in
opposition to Raised Bill No. 5347: An Act Concerning the Review of Criminal Histories for
Prospective Tenants.
March 10, 2022
To the Honorable Co-Chairs Senator Rick Lopes and Representative Quentin Williams, Vice
Chairs, Ranking Members, and distinguished members of the Housing Committee:
We write from the Collaborative Center for Justice, a Catholic social justice advocacy
organization, primarily sponsored by six Congregations of Women Religious across the state.
Our mission includes working for systemic change and advocating for policies that improve the
lives of low-income and other marginalized people. We write in strong opposition to Raised Bill
No. 5347: An Act Concerning the Review of Criminal Histories for Prospective Tenants.
The proposed bill would undermine the Connecticut General Assembly’s attempt at repairing
some of the harms of Connecticut’s now-contracting prison boom. The pursuit of justice has not
been equitable. Incarcerated people are more likely to be people of color, to be poor, and to
suffer from mental illness. Despite the declining prison population, inequality under the law
persists: Despite accounting for just 11% of the state population, Black people are 41% of the
incarcerated population.1 Not only do Black people receive harsher, longer sentences for the
same offences as white people, they are often more likely to be charged in the first place.2 By
permitting housing discrimination against those with erased criminal records – and by extension
their families – the legislature would further compound these injustices. Treating formerly
incarcerated people who have had their records erased as a protected class, as last session’s
Clean Slate legislation does, begins to remedy this injustice.
This change would also undermine the state’s expressed goals of reducing recidivism.
Nationally, for every 10,000 formerly incarcerated people, 540 are housing insecure, making
them 10 times more likely to experience homelessness than the general population.3
It is immoral
to create additional barriers to fundamental rights as the proposed bill would. Having stable, safe
housing is an important foundation for being able to maintain employment and for maintaining
basic health and wellbeing. Facing discrimination based on a sealed criminal record makes
finding safe, affordable, stable housing even more difficult. Studies have repeatedly shown the
link between housing insecurity and recidivism. Indeed, given the preponderance of anti-
homeless laws across Connecticut’s municipalities, formerly incarcerated people who experience
homelessness do not have to do much to face rearrest.4
Prison is punishment. Parole is punishment. By the time someone has had their criminal history
sealed by the Board of Pardons and Parole and by virtue of their eligibility to benefit from Clean
Slate, they would have already been punished and remained crime-free. Permitting housing
discrimination on the basis of a sealed record would extend their punishment to a lifetime,
effectively barring them from full participation in our society.
We proudly echo the words of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops year 2000
statement on criminal justice reform, “Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration: A
Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice,” saying:
Just as God never abandons us, so too we must be in covenant with one another. We are all
sinners, and our response to sin and failure should not be abandonment and despair, but rather
justice, contrition, reparation, and return or reintegration of all into the community.5
It is morally wrong for the state to disregard the humanity of its people by punishing them in
perpetuity. Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Respectfully,
Dwayne David Paul – Director
Rachel Lea Scott – Associate Director
