Can a Hawthorne Landlord Ask About a Tenant's Immigration Status? What Civil Code Sections 1940.3 and 1940.35 Say

Published August 10, 2026

California law bars a landlord from asking about, requiring disclosure of, or reporting a tenant's immigration or citizenship status for harassment, retaliation, or eviction purposes. Disclosing that information to authorities to harass a tenant carries statutory damages of six to twelve times the monthly rent.

The short answer

No. Civil Code section 1940.3 bars a landlord from asking about, requiring disclosure of, or threatening to disclose a tenant's immigration or citizenship status for harassment, intimidation, retaliation, or to recover possession. Actually disclosing that status to immigration authorities to harass a tenant, under section 1940.35, carries statutory damages of six to twelve times the monthly rent per person affected.

Last verified: August 10, 2026

The Hawthorne context

Hawthorne has one of the more diverse renter populations in the South Bay, and its rental stock includes a large share of smaller, individually owned buildings where the landlord has direct contact with tenants rather than working through a large management office. That direct contact is exactly where an off-the-cuff question about a tenant's status, asked during a dispute over rent, noise, or a lease violation, turns into a statutory violation. The law does not require you to have acted maliciously to have a problem. It requires only that the inquiry or disclosure be for one of the prohibited purposes.

The three sections that work together

Civil Code section 1940.05 is a definitions section only. It states that "immigration or citizenship status" includes a perception that a person has a particular status, or that the person is associated with someone who has, or is perceived to have, a particular status. This section does not itself prohibit anything. It sets the term used by the operative sections below.

Civil Code section 1940.3 is the section that actually bars the inquiry. It has four subdivisions. Subdivision (a) bars a public entity from compelling a landlord to inquire about, compile, disclose, or report a tenant's immigration or citizenship status. Subdivision (b) is aimed at landlords directly: a landlord may not make an inquiry about a tenant's or occupant's immigration or citizenship status, may not require a tenant to disclose that status, and may not disclose that information to any person or entity, all for the purpose of harassing, intimidating, or retaliating against a tenant, or recovering possession of the unit. Subdivision (c) carves out an exception: a landlord may comply with a federal legal obligation, a subpoena, a warrant, or a court order, and may still request the financial and identity documentation ordinarily used to qualify an applicant. Subdivision (d) defines "public entity" and "state" for purposes of the section. Notably, the text of section 1940.3 itself does not spell out a specific civil penalty for a violation, so the practical consequence of a bare unlawful inquiry, standing alone, is not fully settled in the statute's own language.

Civil Code section 1940.35 covers the more serious act, actually disclosing a tenant's immigration or citizenship status to an immigration authority. It is unlawful to make that disclosure for the purpose of harassing or intimidating a tenant, retaliating against a tenant for exercising their rights, influencing a tenant to vacate, or recovering possession. This section carries the teeth: a court must order the landlord to pay statutory damages of between six and twelve times the monthly rent charged for the unit, for each person whose status was disclosed, plus injunctive relief against similar future conduct, notification to the district attorney, and attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing party. The same federal-compliance exception applies, and any tenant waiver of these rights is void as a matter of public policy.

Civil Code section 1940.2 rounds out the group, though it is broader than immigration status alone. It bars a landlord from using several coercive tactics, including theft, extortion, force or menacing conduct, or significant utility or service shutoffs, for the purpose of pushing a tenant to vacate. One of the listed tactics is threatening to disclose a tenant's immigration or citizenship status. A violation carries a civil penalty of up to $2,000 per violation, recoverable in court, including small claims court.

Quick reference

| Section | What it does | Remedy stated in the section |

|---|---|---|

| 1940.05 | Defines "immigration or citizenship status" | None, definitional only |

| 1940.3 | Bars landlord inquiry, required disclosure, or disclosure to harass, intimidate, retaliate, or recover possession | None stated in the section itself |

| 1940.2 | Bars threatening to disclose status, among other coercive acts, to push a tenant to vacate | Civil penalty up to $2,000 per violation |

| 1940.35 | Bars actual disclosure to immigration authorities to harass, intimidate, retaliate, or recover possession | Damages of 6 to 12 times monthly rent per person, injunctive relief, DA notification, attorney's fees |

What this means in practice for a Hawthorne landlord

Do not ask about a tenant's or applicant's immigration or citizenship status, ever, as a matter of practice, not just because it may be unlawful under section 1940.3 but because the safer path for tenant screening is the financial and identity verification the statute explicitly permits, income documentation, credit history, rental history, and government-issued identification that does not turn on status. That is the carve-out in subdivision (c), and it gives you everything you actually need to qualify an applicant.

If a dispute escalates and you are tempted to mention a tenant's status, whether to a code enforcement officer, a process server, or in a text message to the tenant themselves, stop. The moment that mention is connected to wanting the tenant out, you are in section 1940.2 or 1940.35 territory, and the tenant does not need to prove the disclosure worked, only that you made it for that purpose.

A practical rollout for a small portfolio

1. Strip any question about citizenship, immigration status, visa type, or country of origin from your rental application and interview process. Use income, credit, and rental history instead.
2. Train anyone who handles tenant disputes on your behalf, including a property manager or a maintenance contact who deals with tenants directly, that immigration status is never a lever to use in a dispute, even informally.
3. If you receive a subpoena, warrant, or court order asking about a tenant's status, or a genuine federal legal obligation applies, document that basis before responding, since that is the one exception the statute preserves.
4. If a tenant tells you they believe their status was disclosed by someone connected to your property, treat it as a serious incident and get an attorney involved immediately, given the six to twelve times rent exposure under section 1940.35.

FAQ

Can I ask a rental applicant if they are a U.S. citizen or have legal status?

No, not under Civil Code section 1940.3, which bars a landlord from inquiring about immigration or citizenship status. Use income, credit, and identity verification instead, which the statute permits.

What if I need documentation for a legitimate reason, like a court order?

Section 1940.3 has an exception for complying with a federal legal obligation, a subpoena, a warrant, or a court order. It also allows the ordinary financial and identity documentation used to qualify a tenant.

What happens if I threaten to report a tenant to immigration authorities during a rent dispute?

That falls under Civil Code section 1940.2, which bars using such a threat to push a tenant to vacate, and carries a civil penalty of up to $2,000 per violation.

What if I actually report a tenant's status to immigration authorities?

That is covered by Civil Code section 1940.35 if done to harass, intimidate, retaliate, or recover possession. The court must order damages of six to twelve times the monthly rent for each person affected, plus injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and notification to the district attorney.

Can a tenant waive these protections in the lease?

No. Civil Code section 1940.35 states that any waiver of these rights is void as a matter of public policy.

Does simply asking the question, without any threat or disclosure, expose me to a specific penalty?

The statute itself, section 1940.3, prohibits the inquiry but does not spell out its own civil penalty within that section. Confirm the practical exposure for an inquiry standing alone with a licensed attorney.

This is general information, not legal advice. Confirm current statutory text at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov and consult a licensed attorney before adjusting your tenant screening or dispute-handling practices.

Topics: compliance, landlord law, fair housing, South Bay, Hawthorne

Get a free management quote

Back to the Schofield Properties blog

Schofield Properties is a family run property management company at 323 Richmond St, El Segundo, CA 90245. We have managed the South Bay since 1972 and personally oversee about 186 doors today. Book a call to talk about your property.