San Jose Mun. Code Chapter 17.23 § 17.23.1270

Anti-retaliation protections (San Jose Apartment Rent Ordinance and Tenant Protection Ordinance)

In Force
Verified 6/11/2026 · Next check 9/9/2026
San JoseRetaliation Protections

Operative Text

San Jose Mun. Code Chapter 17.23 § 17.23.1270
A. No Landlord may threaten to bring, or bring, an action to recover possession, cause the Tenant to quit the Rental Unit involuntarily, serve any notice to quit or Notice of Termination, reduce any housing services, report or threaten to report the Tenant, Tenant Household, or individuals the Landlord knows to be associated with the Tenant to the immigration authorities, or increase the rent where the Landlord's intent is retaliation against the Tenant for the Tenant's assertion or exercise of rights under this Part.
B. Any such retaliation shall be a defense to an action to recover possession, or it may serve as the basis for an affirmative action by the Tenant for actual and punitive damages and injunctive relief. In an action by or against a Tenant, evidence of the assertion or exercise by the Tenant of rights under this Part within six months prior to the alleged act of retaliation shall create a rebuttable presumption that the Landlord's act was retaliatory. For purposes of this subsection, "rebuttable presumption" means that the Court must find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until its nonexistence is proven by a preponderance of the evidence. A Tenant may assert retaliation affirmatively or as a defense to the Landlord's action without the aid of the rebuttable presumption regardless of the period of time which has elapsed between the Tenant's assertion or exercise of rights under this Part and the alleged act of retaliation.
C. No Landlord shall provide information to any immigration authority regarding the immigration or citizenship status of any Tenant, Tenant Household, or individual the Landlord knows to be associated with the Tenant or Tenant Household, for the purposes of harassing, intimidating, or retaliating against a Tenant or Tenant Household, influencing a Tenant to vacate a Rental Unit, or recovering possession of a Rental Unit, in accordance with Civil Code Section 1940.35(a), as amended.
D. A Landlord does not violate subsection (A) or (C), by complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified Tenant.
Source: Legislative text reproduced verbatim
Plain English

San Jose Municipal Code § 17.23.1270 prohibits landlords from taking adverse actions—such as eviction, rent increases, service reductions, or reporting tenants to immigration authorities—when the motivation is to punish a tenant for exercising rights under the city's rent regulations. If a tenant exercised such rights within the six months before an alleged retaliatory act, the law presumes the landlord's conduct was retaliatory, placing the burden on the landlord to prove otherwise. Retaliation can be raised as a defense in eviction proceedings or as the basis for a tenant's own claim for damages and injunctive relief.

Written by anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6 · Reviewed on September 3, 2026

Plain English — not legal advice.

For Property Managers

Under § 17.23.1270, compliant operators ensure that any rent increase, notice to quit, reduction in services, or contact with immigration authorities is grounded in legitimate, documented business or legal reasons—not a tenant's exercise of rent-regulation rights. Operators should be aware that adverse actions taken within six months of a tenant asserting such rights trigger a rebuttable presumption of retaliation, meaning the burden shifts to the landlord to demonstrate a non-retaliatory basis. Participating in federal rental-assistance programs that require rent limitations does not constitute a violation of this provision.

General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.

For Tenants

Section 17.23.1270 protects tenants in San Jose from eviction, rent hikes, service cuts, or immigration-related threats made in response to exercising rights under the city's rent regulations. If you experienced an adverse landlord action within six months of asserting those rights, the law presumes retaliation occurred, and you may raise that as a defense in an eviction case or pursue an affirmative claim for actual and punitive damages. Tenant-rights organizations and the San Jose Rent Program can provide general information about how this protection applies and what enforcement paths exist.

General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.

Generated September 3, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.

Effective Timeline

Click on timeline segments to view historical versions.

References Out

No outbound references recorded yet for this provision.

References In

No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.

Related Rules

§ 18
Reprisal for reporting violations of law or for tenant's union activity; damages and costs; notice of termination, presumption; waiver in leases or other rental agreements prohibited
§ 27
Jurisdiction of courts to restrain violation of Secs. 23 to 26; applicability of other laws to requests to change locks
§ 2A
Reprisal for reporting violations of law, for tenant's union activity, or actions taken pursuant to laws protecting tenants who are victims of domestic violence, rape, sexual assault or stalking; defense; presumption

Source Information