Are NAR’s New MLS Policies About to Backfire? Michigan Case Tests the Waters
Just days after the National Association of Realtors announced sweeping changes to its MLS Handbook at NAR NXT 2025, the organization is already facing legal blowback — and the first test is unfolding in Michigan.
In the Hardy case, which challenges mandatory Realtor association membership as a condition of MLS access, plaintiffs wasted no time arguing that NAR’s new policies effectively validate their claims. According to attorney Michael Clawson, the timing and nature of these revisions represent what he calls:
“essentially admitting that its previous policy was a violation of antitrust law.”
A Motion Filed Within 48 Hours of NAR’s Announcement
On Nov. 19, Clawson submitted a motion requesting the court’s permission to include NAR’s fresh policy revisions as evidence. The updates, revealed on Nov. 17, shift control over non‑member MLS access from the national level to local associations.
Clawson argues that if NAR removed membership as a prerequisite for MLS access, then the policy must have been problematic to begin with. He wrote that the decision “clearly removes the requirement of NAR membership as a precursor to MLS access.”
Read the original Real Estate News report
NAR Responds: “No Admission of Wrongdoing Here.”
NAR quickly pushed back in a Nov. 21 statement, saying the revisions don’t undermine its long‑standing position. MLSs, they stressed, have always had local discretion when determining access requirements — including whether membership is mandatory.
“NAR stands by the pro‑competitive, pro‑consumer local broker marketplaces… Each local MLS sets their own requirements for determining access to the platform.”
Their statement made one thing clear: the legal fight is far from over.
Where This All Began
The Hardy lawsuit, filed in August 2024 by Michigan real estate professionals Douglas Hardy, Glenn Champion and Dylan Trent, argues that requiring agents to join NAR, Michigan Realtors and a local board simply to access the MLS is unfair and anticompetitive.
The case gained momentum amid NAR’s massive settlement over buyer‑agent commission structures. With many MLSs removing offers of compensation, plaintiffs argue that the value of association membership has decreased — while fees remain high.
Background: NAR’s landmark commission settlement
A National Trend: Similar Cases in Multiple States
Michigan isn’t alone. Lawsuits challenging mandatory Realtor membership have surfaced in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas and Louisiana. NAR has won cases in Texas and Pennsylvania — but both are now under appeal.
Explore the nationwide membership challenges
With the spotlight now on Michigan, the big question is whether NAR’s new policy changes will sway the court’s opinion — or if the organization can convince judges that nothing meaningful has truly changed.
Why This Matters for Real Estate Professionals
MLS access remains the backbone of today’s real estate industry. Any changes to who can access it — and under what conditions — could reshape professional standards nationwide.
For those pursuing or renewing real estate licenses, especially in Florida and across the U.S., understanding evolving MLS rules is essential. Institutions such as Cameron Academy actively monitor these developments to ensure students and professionals receive relevant, practical training that keeps them industry‑ready.
As the Michigan case develops, expect continued debate, new legal filings and potentially a redefinition of how MLS systems and Realtor associations operate across the country.
