Skip to main content

I don't write here very often, but sometimes an issue comes up that is important enough to share with this group.

By way of background, the Fair Housing Act is a 1968 law that (as amended) prohibits housing discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability and familial status (the presence of children under 18 in a household).  This is a bit of an oversimplification, but under the Act, one can prove discrimination under a theory of disparate treatment - i.e., that landlord INTENTIONALLY failed to rent to me because I have a disability, am a woman, am African-American, etc.  Though there are several ways to prove it, that THEORY is pretty non-controversial.

What's slightly more controversial is a theory called "disparate impact."  Disparate impact refers to a policy or procedure that is neutral on its face (in other words, it doesn't explicitly prohibit someone who's black or disabled from getting housing) but in practice comes down harder on some than others.  The beauty of disparate impact is that you don't have to prove intent (although it's often there); all you have to show is that the policy has the impact.  If the housing provider can't justify the policy and show that it's the least discriminatory way to serve its purpose, he loses.

Examples of disparate impact:

-- A mobile home park charges rent by the head rather than by the unit, which makes it more expensive for families with children to rent.  The landlord can't justify the extra cost.  The policy is likely illegal.

-- An apartment complex has a requirement that only people with full-time jobs can live there.  That would make the housing unavailable to people with disabilities who could pay the rent even though they are unable to work.

-- An apartment complex changes hands and suddenly decides to stop accepting Section 8 vouchers.  That policy would have a disparate impact on people of color, who use Section 8 in higher percentages than whites.

-- An insurance company decides that in some lower-income neighborhoods it will provide only "market value" house coverage instead of replacement, because the property values are lowers than the replacement cost.  Those lower-income neighborhoods with depressed property values are more likely to be integrated or predominantly composed of people of color.

EVERY JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN THE COUNTRY recognizes disparate impact as a viable theory of liability under the Fair Housing Act.  Unfortunately, there's a case out of the Third Circuit that may be heard by the Supreme Court, currently composed by a majority of justices that would like nothing more than to get rid of the disparate impact theory.  (If you're interested, it's Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc. v. Twp. of Mt. Holly, 658 F.3d 375.)

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has long been in the process of developing a regulation on disparate impact, and that regulation would basically say, "HUD, the federal agency that enforces the Fair Housing Act, believes that disparate impact is a viable theory of liability.  Here's how you prove it, and here's how the housing provider can rebut it."

A regulation issued right now would be VERY helpful in the Mt. Holly case and going forward, because Supreme Court jurisprudence generally favors deference ("Chevron deference," for you law geeks) to agency interpretations of federal statutes, as long as the interpretation is not completely off the wall.  Even Scalia likes Chevron deference.

So a reg from HUD right now would go a long way toward preserving the disparate impact theory.  HUD received a couple hundred comments on the reg, most of which were in favor of its adoption.  It's currently being reviewed.

So what's the GOP doing to stop this reg from going forward?  Well, Rep. Scott Garrett, R-New Jersey, has offered an amendment to the FY2013 HUD budget that would prevent HUD from using any of its money to "promulgate, issue, establish, implement, administer, finalize, or enforce the proposed rule issued by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2011 (76 F.R. 70921; relating to implementation of the Fair Housing Act’s Discriminatory Effects Standard)."

So that's what you do when you can't win on the merits or in the court of public opinion - you defund the thing you don't like.

PLEASE call your member of Congress and tell him or her to reject the Garrett Amendment to H.R. 5972 regarding disparate impact.  The amendment would gut fair housing protections and potentially wipe out a theory of housing discrimination that, again, EVERY SINGLE CIRCUIT has recognized.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site