<p>Upon their arrival in Europe, asylum seekers typically stay in state-subsidized, low-standard, and overcrowded accommodation. These living conditions can engender mental and physical health issues and be the source of conflict between residents, discomfort, and feelings of unhomeliness and non-belonging. While hardly anyone would argue that asylum seekers ought to live in these conditions, recent philosophical contributions on asylum ethics have overlooked the question of what living arrangements do liberal democracies owe asylum seekers. In this paper, I fill this gap by arguing that asylum seekers are owed a right to housing on the basis of their social membership. I first argue that asylum seekers’ claim to social membership requires receiving states to accommodate asylum seekers’ individuality in the provision of living arrangements during the period of asylum reception. I thus defend their right to housing. After, I show that current living arrangements for asylum seekers violate this right and explain that both humanitarian and membership repair frameworks are ill-suited to guide receiving states in providing asylum seekers with an accommodation that fulfils their right to housing, strengthening my initial argument that asylum seekers’ right to housing relies on the principle of accommodation.</p>