Legal News

Supreme Court Upholds Policies That Protect Housing Discrimination
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

Texas Housing Department

Summary: In a case brought by The Inclusive Communities Project against the Texas Department of Housing, the Supreme Court sided with the ICP regarding disparate impact.

The Fair Housing Act gives housing practices and policies without the intent to discriminate the right to be challenged, ruled the Supreme Court Thursday in a 5-4 vote. The case was between the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and The Inclusive Communities Project. The two were arguing the theory of disparate impact and its application to the Fair Housing Act of 1968.The Act was originally passed a week after Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated.

  
What
Where


Disparate impact is particularly important when fighting against racial inequality since it allows lawsuits against policies the unreasonably affect those of color, even if there is no racial motive. The ICP is a Dallas-area nonprofit organization that fights for economic and racially diverse populations. They brought the lawsuit against the TDHCA after discovering that they giving out most of the affordable-housing tax credits to developments in areas that are more populated with poor minorities. These tax credits effect racial segregation by preventing low-income people, which are mostly minorities, from moving to communities that are predominantly white.

Their lawsuit claimed that even though the housing agency may not intend to be racially discriminatory, the policy was. The rules the Department of Housing and Urban Development set 2013 gave the TDHCA an opportunity to show that the credits given out fulfilled a nondiscriminatory business interest after the ICP was able to show statistical data of the disparate impact in court. They were unable to show this without using a more discriminatory process. They could prove a legitimate interest in the distribution of credits but the pursuit of the interest was not in the least discriminatory way. They lost in federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Those critical of disparate impact fear that the practice unjustly targets policymakers and private institutions by punishing them for what can be facially neutral practices and policies. There is also the concern that the theory will open up the private sectors to expensive lawsuits where they have an unreasonable burden of proof to supply.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/25/supreme-court-housing-discrimination_n_7471048.html

Photo: npr.org





 

BCG FEATURED JOB

Locations:

Keyword:



Search Now

Junior Land Use Attorney with experience

USA-CA-Westlake Village

Los Angeles office is seeking a junior land use associate with 1-6 years of experience. Candidate mu...

Apply Now

RELEVANT JOBS

Litigation Attorney

USA-IL-Chicago

AV-rated, Chicago Loop defense firm of trial lawyers seeks associate attorneys to join our busy liti...

Apply now

Litigation Attorney (5+ years)

USA-FL-Fort Lauderdale

The Fort Lauderdale office of Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck seeks an experienced litigation associate wi...

Apply now

Director of Originations, Litigation Finance Investments

USA-TX-Dallas

Location is flexible nationwide -- NOT only Dallas. Job Summary Rapidly growing litigatio...

Apply now

Market Research Consulting Analyst for Litigation Projects

USA-MA-Waltham

Applied Marketing Science, Inc. (AMS) is a market research and consulting firm located in Waltham, M...

Apply now

Most Popular

SEARCH IN ARCHIVE

To Top