by Vanguard Staff
SAN FRANCISCO — The ACLU Foundation of Northern California and two partner law firms filed a lawsuit Thursday against major landlord Equity Residential and surveillance technology vendor SmartRent, alleging the companies violated tenants’ constitutional privacy rights by forcing the use of in-home “smart” surveillance systems.
The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, challenges the installation of SmartRent technology in residential units owned or operated by Equity Residential, one of the largest corporate landlords in the United States. The complaint names SmartRent Technologies Inc. as a co-defendant and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to halt what plaintiffs describe as unlawful monitoring inside people’s homes.
According to the ACLU, tenants in multiple San Francisco-area buildings were required to accept so-called “smart home” systems as a condition of their tenancy. The systems include digital door locks, thermostats and environmental sensors that collect data about tenants’ movements, habits and home conditions, and transmit that information to landlords and third-party technology providers.
The technology does not appear on its face to be surveillance equipment. The systems consist of digital door locks, thermostats and small environmental sensors that resemble ordinary apartment fixtures, leading tenant advocates to argue that residents may not immediately understand the extent to which activity inside their homes can be recorded or analyzed.
“It’s against the law for landlords to force tenants to have surveillance devices in their homes,” said Jake Snow, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California. “This is a flagrant abuse of people’s privacy.”
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three current and former Equity Residential tenants — William Solis, Adrian Phua and Elana Diestel — along with the San Francisco Tenants Union, a nonprofit organization that advocates for tenant rights. The complaint argues that the California Constitution guarantees residents a fundamental right to privacy in their homes and that this right cannot be waived through lease agreements or technology addenda.
Equity Residential owns or operates tens of thousands of rental units in California, according to the complaint, while SmartRent provides and manages the technology used to collect data from inside residential units. Plaintiffs allege that the technology allows landlords to track when tenants enter and leave their homes, monitor guest activity and observe environmental patterns that could reveal personal routines.
Solis, one of the named plaintiffs, said his landlord installed a SmartRent system in his San Francisco apartment after he had lived there for nearly six years.
“Everywhere we go today, whether it’s online, at work, or in public spaces, we’re being tracked by a massive surveillance apparatus,” Solis said. “Your home is the one place where you shouldn’t have to worry about being watched.”
The lawsuit disputes claims by landlords and technology vendors that “smart home” devices are primarily for tenant convenience. The ACLU contends that the systems enable invasive data collection that could be used to profile tenants or target those perceived as too costly or undesirable.
Tenant advocates say the mandatory nature of the technology leaves renters with little meaningful choice, particularly in San Francisco’s high-cost housing market.
“San Francisco has some of the highest housing costs in the country,” said Layla Stanley, secretary of the board of directors at the San Francisco Tenants Union. “We are proud to join this lawsuit on behalf of tenants who have a right not to live in places where their landlords are monitoring them in pursuit of profits.”
The complaint also names Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP and Tobener Ravenscroft LLP as co-counsel representing the plaintiffs. Attorneys for the tenants argue the case raises fundamental questions about the limits of landlord control and the role of technology in private living spaces.
“The San Francisco Tenants Union and the other tenants filing this lawsuit are standing up for the simple truth that someone’s home is one of the most sacred and private spaces where people can be safe from the outside world,” said Joseph Tobener, a partner at Tobener Ravenscroft LLP. “When a landlord forces somebody to have a surveillance device in their home just to have a roof over their head, that’s not convenience. It’s coercion. And it’s unconstitutional in California.”
Melissa Gardner, a partner at Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, said the case is intended to rebalance power between tenants and large corporate landlords.
“People often feel powerless against their landlords,” Gardner said. “The laws these tenants invoke can check corporate abuse and level the playing field.”
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
