Will NAR’s MLS policy changes impact mandatory membership cases?
An attorney in Michigan’s Hardy case argued that NAR “is essentially admitting” that its previous MLS policy violated antitrust law.
It appears that the National Association of Realtors will get an early test on whether the MLS policy changes it made at NAR NXT 2025 will hurt them in pending mandatory membership court cases.
An attorney in the Hardy case in Michigan filed a motion on Nov. 19 requesting to submit information about those changes, which were announced on Nov. 17. The revisions to NAR's MLS Handbook focused on non-member requests for MLS access, leaving membership rules up to local associations.
In the Nov. 19 motion, the plaintiffs' attorney, Michael Clawson, noted that NAR made the changes after obtaining lawyers to conduct an antitrust risk assessment. Through its policy revisions, NAR "is essentially admitting that its previous policy was a violation" of antitrust law.
"The decision, which is codified in the NAR's MLS Policies and Procedure Handbook, clearly removes the requirement of NAR membership as a precursor to MLS access, a critical claim in the pending matter before this court," Clawson wrote.
What NAR had to say: NAR defended the changes in a Nov. 21 email statement to Real Estate News. "NAR stands by the pro-competitive, pro-consumer local broker marketplaces, which local associations may choose to provide as a member benefit," the statement said. "Each local MLS sets their own requirements for determining access to the platform."
The recently announced MLS Handbook changes "do not change the fact that MLSs have local discretion about whether to require association membership to participate," the statement added. "We will respond directly in court."
How we got here: The case was initially filed in August 2024 by Southeastern Michigan real estate professionals Douglas Hardy, Glenn Champion and Dylan Trent. They are challenging a rule that requires brokers to be members of three organizations —NAR, the state association (Michigan Realtors) and one of the local associations listed as defendants — in order to access the MLS.
The case was filed after the NAR settlement over buyer agent commission fees. One of the rules that came out of the settlement was the elimination of offers of compensation from the MLS, which the plaintiffs argued "greatly diminished any value" offered by the associations. They also called out the significant fees required for membership.
Other pending mandatory membership cases: Similar cases sprung up in several states following the Hardy filing, including in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas and Louisiana. The cases in Pennsylvania and in Texas are currently going through the appeals process after NAR notched victories in each.