A federal discrimination lawsuit was filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the eastern district of Arkansas against a whites-only community. The next day, Return to the Land co-founders Eric Orwoll and Peter Csere went live on their Rumble page to talk about the New York Times article that broke the news and the lawsuit. Csere holds a printed-out version of the story.
“So, according to The New York Times, last summer, Michelle Walker was watching the local five o'clock news in her Saint Louis living room when a segment about a real estate opportunity caught her attention.”
Michelle Walker is a St. Louis-based real estate broker and the named plaintiff in a lawsuit against Return to the Land. The suit was filed by Relman Colfax, the Legal Defense Fund and Legal Aid of Arkansas and argues that this whites-only community violates the Fair Housing Act at the federal and state level. Abigail Herzfeld is a fair housing staff attorney for Legal Aid of Arkansas. She says the federal Fair Housing Act is a prominent element of the Civil Rights Act that passed after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
“The Fair Housing Act was passed in particular to fight housing discrimination. And it really started as housing discrimination on the basis of race. And, you know, you can imagine why that would be a problem and would stop people from being able to live and feel safe in their homes.”
Herzfeld says Legal Aid’s participation in the suit is to represent the state of Arkansas and Return to the Land is also violating the Arkansas Fair Housing Act.
“There are private club exceptions to the Arkansas Fair Housing Act and the federal Fair Housing Act, but the private club exception only really applies to. Whenever the housing is like an. It's kind of like incidental to the primary purpose. So where we see this come up a lot is with sororities and fraternities. The private club exception, for example, would allow a sorority house to only have female. Identifying people live there, but it is not. We do not believe it applies in this case.”
Csere says that’s not actually the basis of their argument.
“We've never relied on the private club exemption from the Fair Housing Act, but there's probably a dozen news articles that claim that we do, and they try to make legal arguments for us, which, I mean, it doesn't make any sense unless they're trying to prejudice judges against us, right?”
Orwoll jumps in.
“I mean, I might have mentioned that exception at one point, and then they take that and run with it. Yeah, it's I mean, I've mentioned it in the past. It's certainly relevant, but it's not one that our structure relies upon.”
Herzfeld says it’s important to recognize that the two leaders — Orwoll and Csere — are not native Arkansans. Owroll is originally from La Mirada, California, just outside LA. Csere is from Connecticut.
“They chose Arkansas because they believe racial segregation is normal in Arkansas and that judges are on their side. And I really think that is important for Legal Aid to be involved, for all Arkansans to know that, you know, you have someone here, you have a group of people who are fighting for your rights in housing and housing discrimination. And yes, we have national partners as well. And we are very thankful to, you know, have them help with the litigation efforts. But it's really important for us to stand up against this for everyone in Arkansas, because we know that's not true.”
In the complaint, Walker says her application to purchase property in the Ravenden-based community was rejected because Return to the Land’s founders is explicitly attempting to establish an all-white community. Walker is a Jewish woman, married to a Black man, and has biracial children. She told the New York Times she was hoping to learn more about how renting out a home there would work, but she did not intend on moving her family to live there.
Return to the Land posted on their Facebook page, disputing what has been reported about them in several news outlets. They wrote that Walker didn’t apply to purchase property. Instead, she applied to join an online membership association. One commenter asked why Walker was rejected, the group replied saying “even if Ms. Walker and her entire family were European, she would likely have been denied for her political views. RTTL certainly does not accept any liberals.”
The lawsuit names not only Return to the Land, but it also names the local chapter, the Arkansas-based LLC, and the five co-founders individually. Herzfeld says this is common practice for their work at Legal Aid to not only include the LLC a landlord might run their rental business through, but to also name the landlords personally.
“The rationale is that, you know, partly I like to kind of talk about vicarious liability. Sometimes a lot of people are familiar with that. You know, that your employer is responsible for the acts of the employees. And so I just believe that everyone involved should be held liable for the discrimination.”
Herzfeld says she has seen comments about how private individuals are not held accountable for housing discrimination or civil rights laws across the board.
“And that is untrue. Everyone is held accountable to these housing laws. I mean, there are exceptions, of course, like every civil rights law. But there are no exceptions for race. And I think people just sometimes misunderstand their rights as private individuals. And I think some of these housing laws and civil rights laws may only apply to public individuals.”
Walker’s complaint is asking the court for an injunction to stop Return to the Land from engaging in further housing discrimination. She is also seeking for damages for “emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and pain and suffering.”
Return to the Land has had a fundraiser for their legal fees running since November 2024, which was about 18 months before a lawsuit was ever filed. The goal is set at $200,000. As of this recording, they have received more than $142,000 towards that goal with more than 1,500 donors. Cofounders Orwoll and Csere discuss back and forth in the Rumble video the consequences of the legal action. We hear Orwoll first.
“We would obviously love the option to take it to trial if that was necessary. It’s just that greatly increases the expense.”
“And they would want a jury trial, because if they make it be a jury trial, then it’s gonna cost us a heck of a lot more, obviously. I mean, their goal is to drain us basically financially.”
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge D. Price Marshall Jr., and a date has not been set yet for the trial.
Ozarks at Large transcripts are created on a rush deadline and edited for length and clarity. Copy editors utilize AI tools to review work. KUAF does not publish content created by AI. Please reach out to kuafinfo@uark.edu to report an issue. The audio version is the authoritative record of KUAF programming.
