By Cara L. Gallagher, weekend contributor
While you were celebrating your free healthcare at gay wedding receptions, you likely missed a decision in a critical case about discrimination, housing, and a legal matter called disparate impact. The decision in this case (Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project) came down Thursday and was off the radar because the Obamacare decision came down the same day. Roberts delivered the Obamacare decision, which upheld the national insurance program and was joined by five other justices. Yes, this much-hyped case – the biggest of the term, in the eyes of some – did not turn out to be a 5-4 decision. The Texas case, however, was the 5-4 case of the day in which Kennedy cast a decisive vote and authored the opinion for the four other liberal justices.
I wrote about this case shortly after the oral arguments were given back in January. It explores The Fair Housing Act, passed in April of 1968, which was signed into law immediately after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated. The intent of the law was to eradicate discriminatory housing practices that resulted in segregated neighborhoods. Such obstacles to had long kept minorities from opportunities because of their “race, color, religion, or national origin.”
A group called the Inclusive Communities Project (ICP) challenged Texas’ Department of Housing for giving too many tax credits to housing in predominantly black neighborhoods. While awarding tax credits seems inherently good and in the spirit of the Act, if they’re repeatedly awarded to housing developers in predominantly black, low-income neighborhoods then they keep black neighborhoods black and white neighborhoods white. In short, when the money (tax credits) stays in the same place, it does nothing to integrate neighborhoods, especially those segregated over decades. None of the tax credits were being sent to housing developers in white neighborhoods. In fact, “92% of low income housing tax credit projects were put into communities of color.” Consider the long-term effects a lack of housing mobility has on a family. It doesn’t simply limit the number of choices of neighborhoods they have to pick from; it also impacts what schools their children attend, the quality of their education, health (more food “deserts” and less quality grocery options), access to transportation, job opportunities, safety, and life expectancy.
The housing credits are provided by the federal government, which is how they got involved in this case, but the states hold the power to distribute the credits to the developers. The state of Texas argued they distributed the tax credits in the way they saw necessary, one that was race-neutral and lacked any intent to discriminate.
The ICP argued that, although the intent wasn’t to discriminate, the end results perpetuated segregated neighborhoods. This is what is referred to in the case as “disparate impact,” which is when a policy is written in a neutral way but has an effect that discriminates against a class of people. In an interview, Lisa Rice, Vice President of the National Fair Housing Alliance, likened it to insurance companies who refuse to insure a home valued below $65,000. On its face, that’s not an obviously discriminatory rule, but the effect excludes more Latino and Black families, who are more likely to own a home of that value, than whites. The ICP had data that made a compelling argument about the effects tax credits had on housing options for people of color and filed a disparate impact claim against Texas. This data was key for, as Rice said, courts don’t like to be called out as being “racist,” so you better be able to prove discrimination was the end result.
The question the Supreme Court had to answer was whether or not a group like the ICP can make such a claim when the purpose of the Fair Housing Act was always to prevent discrimination in housing. The ICP argued the spirit of the FHA does, but today’s second-generation discrimination isn’t obvious like it was in 1968 and 1988. The more common forms of discrimination are cancelled appointments, no-shows to apartment showings, convoluted application forms, or requirements of very high credit scores. These are common race-neutral practices in which the intentions are not overtly discriminatory but the outcomes consistently result in white tenants.
In order to prove such practices, groups like the ICP need to be able to file disparate impact claims in courts. Texas argued that if Congress intended to allow disparate impact cases they would’ve articulated exactly those words in the 1988 reauthorization of the FHA. To allow such cases would open the floodgates to anyone who wanted to challenge any seemingly insidious discriminatory business practices of landlords and homeowners in courts.
Justice Kennedy agreed with the ICP. In his opinion, “Recognition of disparate-impact claims is consistent with the FHA’s central purpose…These unlawful practices include zoning laws and other housing restrictions that function unfairly to exclude minorities from certain neighborhoods without any sufficient justification. Suits targeting such practices reside at the heartland of disparate-impact liability.”
In his dissent, Justice Alito said this decision will burden the states by allowing a deluge of disparate impact claims to flood the courts. “At last I come to the ‘purpose’ driving the Court’s analysis: The desire to eliminate the ‘vestiges’ of ‘residential segregation by race.’ We agree that all Americans should be able ‘to buy decent houses without discrimination . . . because of the color of their skin.’ But this Court has no license to expand the scope of the FHA to beyond what Congress enacted.”
The majority’s decision sets a precedent that allows groups to challenge what lies at the heart of insidious racism and discrimination today – the ability to legally challenge policies and actors in the “Oops! I swear, I didn’t intend to be racist!” camp. Although inundated with horrifying stories and images on television from Ferguson, New York, Baltimore, Charleston, and Cleveland (to name but a few), overt racism is far less common than subtle, passive-aggressive forms made by well-intended policy-makers and state agents. Casual acceptance of seemingly neutral laws written with the intent to help the very people the laws are disadvantaging is the modus operandi of the minority in this decision. It’s also the default setting among those who look at the stories that come out of those cities and reconcile such tragedies as the consequences of “choosing” to live in violent neighborhoods. No one chooses to live in places where violence is pervasive. If you think that’s why violence in low-income and minority neighborhoods is so common, ask yourself why it is those families haven’t left by now and then read the data and stories represented by groups like the Inclusive Communities Project.
“Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.” – T.S. Eliot
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
LC in Texas,
The only racism is from freed slaves who, inexplicably refuse and have no desire to return to the homeland they were so violently separated from. Moses led his people out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release. The freed slaves seek to blame Americans who paid a huge price, suffering through Lincoln’s “Reign of Terror” owe the freed slaves held by 1.4% of the American population. The only truly culpable parties are the African tribal chiefs who sold their tribe members to Arab slave traders. It’s hardly accurate to blame, as the catalyst, the addict in America for using the heroin made by Afghanistan. Freed slaves have complained about, begged and extorted money from American taxpayers who have spent $22 trillion since 1965 in the “War on Poverty” (poverty won).
Freed slaves have sought to blame common Americans for something they didn’t do, and something they abolished.
As Lincoln said, compassionate repatriation was the correct remedy to obtain a sense of nationhood and self-esteem for the freed slaves.
It’s time to stop blaming 98.6% of Americans who never owned slaves for the poor performance and lack of success of Africans and their race.
Punitive measures taken against American taxpayers and citizens for over 150 years must be ended. All forms of redistribution such as affirmative action employment, affirmative action grades/education, welfare, “Fair Housing,” rent control, HAMP, HARP, HUD, HHS, food stamps, social services, utility subsides, Obamacare, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, Education, Labor, etc., must be repealed or eliminated.
Compassionate repatriation is owed to freed slaves.
Punitive measure against Americans for something the did not do, is a crime and a charade by liberal collectivists. This phony, bias charade must end.
People must adapt to and live with the consequences of freedom.
I must say this or it will eat at me. doctoryes your line of thinking that there is a policy granting anyone the right to free housing is the very ignorance handicapping individuals today. Any assistance provided to anyone other than to the handicapped is suppose to be temporary as “assistance” . It certainly is not a right or a mandate. Natural law and capitalism is a large part of what America has allowed to steer her in the true spirit of humanity and enabling opportunity for each to prosper at will. Well, there is a law of nature that the strong prosper and the weak either get strong or end up as food. In capitalism consumers are the food businesses grow strong and healthy on. If socialism as a guiding crutch is sought or desired by an individual then leaving this country would be a very good start. Because it will NEVER happen in this “Gods” country.
Everyone likes getting something for nothing. Hence, the popularity of the lottery. I certainly will not respond to Penelope Dreadful and the obvious racism motivating such ignorant TV , hate talking Farrakhan teacher, inspired rhetoric. Such racism is exactly what we all agree needs to be left at the door of life upon entering. I would be ashamed to quote a fictional television show as the source for justification of my argument. Again, as I stated in previous posts, put down the remote and step away from the TV! It is programming the feelings and creating a negative environment in the grey matter of the unaware populace. The need of our citizenry to step back, take a deep breath and begin to investigate the agenda of control and manipulation through mass broadcast runs very deep. I hate the term “sheeple” but it is very appropriate in regard to the context of this thread.
Oh, the red, white and blue! When the band plays Hail to the chief they point the cannon at YOU.
Fortunate Son
Investigate! Contemplate! Propagate!–Then you will stop the hate!
@NickS
“Praise the Lord and pass the accelerant and matches.”
OH, LOL!!!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
And, if I were a corrupt pastor looking to burn my church badly in need of repair, this would be a good time to do it and have the lamebrains be just so sure it’s a hate crime.
The “5 black church arsons” seems to be coming from left wing whacko sources. If there is ANTHING linking 5 black church arsons the NYT and all the liberal MSM will JUMP on it. I’ll wait for legit sources linked by legit people. I did work for an insurance company called Church Mutual. They write policies for churches. Arson is often not malicious/hate, but arson for profit. And, men of God are not immune from torching their churches to get new ones. I’ve investigated some. Praise the Lord and pass the accelerant and matches.
From my view Ferguson went downhill back in the early 1960s when the city allowed developers to build small two bedroom shingle sided homes on very small lots in wooded areas formerly safe for wildlife and now meant for a herd of Catholics who fled the City of St. Louis. They liked their first homes and had six to nine kids. The next generation wanted something better than a two bedroom shingle sided home which by 1980 was surely worn down. So the next generation moved to a mostly Catholic mostly all white new subdivision in Saint Charles, Mo. The fifty to sixty year old shingle homes down on Teston and Millbank and whatnot are not desired by middle income people. White flight was not because whites fled other races but because each generation of these baby boomers (six to nine kids per mom and dad) had to have a new home in a new subdivision.
Michael Brown was from a new section 8 housing neighborhood on the fringe and outside of Ferguson. He went to Normandy High School. The integrated neighborhoods in Ferguson which overall has a population of 70% black, is not bigoted and does not hate the section 8 housing thugs like Michael Brown who came and robbed the convenience store. From what I have heard, Ferguson does not want anymore Section 8 housing and anymore Michael Browns– strong armed thugs who are white, black or Catholic.
All this talk about racism and equality is purely political. As a “white” average American, I would like to state my views.
#1 – There is no common sense anymore in our public employees, they are simply robots (they don’t read).
#2 – America grew lazy and has failed to protect and defend our Constitution.
#3 – It is the whites that are discriminated against by those who fail to fight for their own country and wants everything America stands for.
#4 – Americans are Americans, not Jewish- Americans, not African-Americans, not British-Americans, or any other hyphenated American. American’s had pride and common sense at one time, what happened?
#5 – Start putting the blame where it belongs – the discontents, that open mouth and insert foot!
There is something very wrong when the SCOTUS ignores and nullifies the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights. The authority of the SCOTUS is to assure that actions comport with literal law, not to modify law.
“Fair Housing,” which is unfair to private property owners, is irrefutably antithetical and unconstitutional. The Constitution does not provide for governmental disposition of private property and, while “all men are created equal,” there is no mandate for government to assure the successful outcome of their lives and endeavors.
The dictatorship of the collective, for the collective and by the collective was imposed on another continent 72 years after the American Revolution by the Communist Manifesto. It is not the mandate of the SCOTUS to implement the Communist Manifesto or otherwise “legislate from the bench.”
The dictatorship of the monarch was eliminated by the American Revolution. The freedom of the individual as the sovereign with dominion was established by the American Founders. The Founders practiced that in daily life. We can observe the letter and spirit of the founding documents.
Basic freedom and the right to private property, including the disposition thereof, are unalienable, natural and do not exist at the discretion and pleasure of the SCOTUS.
The right to “moveable property” exists before government is established. The Founders referred to the natural right of nomadic Indians to personal property that was “moveable.”
The right to personal property Is natural and the Constitution provides the right to private or real property.
The right to disposition of personal, private and real property is understood, natural and existed before government was established.
For the SCOTUS to dispose of private property as “Fair Housing” is criminal insurrection, nullification, usurpation and “legislation from the bench.”
It is the duty of Congress to prosecute this “High crime” by “officers” through impeachment.
To wit,
Article II, Section 4
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Dereliction of duty by Congress is also an egregious offense.
The article began as an information piece about a Supreme Court decision supposedly unpacked by a knowledgeable person. It ended as a screed, a non veiled dumbed down lecture (complete with index finger pointing at everyone except themselves), with one culmination affect–opposite of its intent–: it now makes me wary about any future articles by said “expert.”
I love the Eliot stuff, too! This is from The Hollow Men,
Which, I think the “shadow” is maybe REALITY.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The T. S. Elliot quote is an irony that is deliciously to the point of of Gallaghe’rs narrative. ““Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.” As Gallagher points out, the good intentions of obtaining the tax credits for people in poor neighborhoods has resulted in damage to the people in poor neighborhoods. So she advocates for the equally ironic position of SCOTUS that’s cold hard logic – I musts be some kind of right wing nut.
What a coinkydink! Mick Dumdell did an article about white flight and racism as it relates to the new TV show, Wayward Pines! Here is an excerpt from Wayward White Privilege:
https://pansiesforplato.wordpress.com/2015/06/28/wayward-white-privilege/
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I may be misinterpreting your stance as it relates in your post. I apologize if I am. Are you saying tv is programming the population and using the show as an example?
Not be a blight
If anyone propagates segregation it is the government by providing a central place to live for free and not demanding action of some sort in return. A bed with a roof, a toilet and a sink in a confined space is a castle to a large majority of the world population and they are extremely grateful for it. Most have to take a dump in the bushes by the river. Stop the promulgation of entitlement. I owe you nothing for you giving nothing. You want my tax dollars to pay your rent? I want your neighborhood to be a blight on my city. That’s fairness and equity in trade. This is a free country. Not Singapore or any other country. This government can’t “force anyone to live anywhere. If a person doesn’t like that type of society they are “free” to live anywhere in the world they choose.
Riesling
The NPR reporter said the course work was in English. Nothing was said about entrance requirements. The reporter said subsides were also provided for housing. I didn’t mention that in my original comment because I feared the exceptionalist’s heads would explode
But perhaps my fears were too exaggerated. Many here don’t give a damn about our universities.
Bless you Plessy, may you die a natural order of death.
doctoryes – sorry, read too fast!
Oh please, what a crock of…
Has anyone heard about the five black churches that have been burnt down in the last 6 days? Arson suspected.
http://politic365.com/2015/06/27/5-recent-black-church-arsons-in-sc-nc-ga-tn-fl/
Doctor´s Eyes: My daughter attends university in Germany and we pay 85 Euros a semester. Do the Americans have to pass a German test to be accepted, or is the course work in English? (there are more and more universities offering lectures in English – but the English is not always easy on the ears!)