Fact check: Which specific felony convictions (drug manufacturing, violent crimes, sex offenses, arson) can be used to deny Section 8 housing eligibility under HUD rules in 2025?

1. Mandatory exclusions that change the game: what HUD explicitly bars

HUD’s regulatory framework in 2024–2025 codifies two clear automatic bars to admission to HUD‑assisted housing. First, any individual required to register for life under a State sex‑offender registry is expressly ineligible for admission to HUD‑assisted housing programs, including the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Second, any conviction for manufacturing or producing methamphetamine on federally assisted housing property is an automatic ground for denial. These mandatory exclusions are written into HUD’s regulatory citations referenced in recent guidance and the 2024 rulemaking materials, creating a firm line where prior guidance and discretionary practice had been more variable ^{[1] [2]}. The effect is that sex‑offender registration and on‑property meth production are non‑waivable grounds for denial under HUD’s current posture ^[1].

2. Where discretion remains: violent crimes, other drug convictions, and individualized assessments

Outside the two mandatory exclusions, HUD does not impose a universal prohibition on applicants with felony convictions. Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) and owners maintain discretion to deny admissions based on other criminal activity where records show current illegal drug use, a pattern of alcohol abuse, or violent criminal conduct that threatens health and safety. PHAs must apply standards consistently but can create local policies that treat violent felonies (such as assault or robbery) or prior serious drug‑related evictions as grounds for denial, often after conducting individualized assessments to determine current risk. HUD emphasizes that blanket bans based solely on arrests are inappropriate, and that PHAs should follow the statutory and regulatory provisions at 24 CFR parts cited in HUD materials ^{[2] [3]}.

3. The withdrawn 2024 proposed rule and its lingering influence

HUD’s 2024 proposed rule sought to limit the scope of criminal history screening by narrowing types of criminal activity that could justify denial and by requiring more robust individualized assessments. Although that proposed rule was later withdrawn or revised in 2025 materials, it influenced public guidance and PHA discussions about reducing indiscriminate denials and aligning screening practices with fair housing obligations. The withdrawal means the proposed national limits were not adopted, leaving PHAs with broad existing authority but also with HUD guidance encouraging careful, nondiscriminatory screening. Advocates and PHAs continue to reference the proposed rule’s principles even when it is not in force, and HUD’s retreat left a mix of local practices and continued legal uncertainty ^{[4] [5]}.

4. Practical implications for applicants and PHAs navigating criminal records in 2025

For applicants with criminal histories, the landscape is twofold: absolute in some cases, discretionary in most. Being on a lifetime sex‑offender registry or having a methamphetamine production conviction on federally assisted property will bar admission under HUD policy. For other felonies, outcomes depend on PHA policy, the nature and recency of the offense, evidence of rehabilitation, and whether an individualized assessment shows the applicant no longer poses a threat. PHAs must also avoid reliance on arrests rather than convictions and should document consistent application of standards to withstand fair housing scrutiny. The result is a fragmented national picture where local rules and case‑by‑case determinations largely decide eligibility except for the two explicit exclusions ^{[2] [6]}.

5. Bottom line and what to watch next

In 2025 the clear, enforceable prohibitions under HUD rules are limited: lifetime sex‑offender registration and on‑property meth manufacturing convictions are automatic bars to Section 8 eligibility, while other felony convictions remain subject to PHA discretion, individualized assessments, and applicable HUD regulations. Stakeholders should monitor PHA admissions policies, local enforcement practices, and any new HUD rulemaking or guidance that could narrow or expand mandatory exclusions. The interplay among HUD guidance, proposed—but withdrawn—rules, and local discretion creates a continuing policy flux that applicants, advocates, and housing providers must navigate carefully ^{[1] [2] [4]}.