fair housing

Subscribe to fair housing

On September 4, 2020, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) issued a final rule revising its 2013 Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) disparate impact standards (“2013 Rule”) to reflect the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., which held that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the FHA. … Continue Reading

As we reported, the petition  for certiorari filed in May 2014 by the  Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (Texas DHCA) in Inclusive Communities Project v. Texas Dep’t of Housing and Community Affairs could give the U.S. Supreme Court its third opportunity since 2012 to provide clarity with respect to disparate impact claims under the Fair Housing Act and (by analogy) the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.   … Continue Reading

We have been following the lawsuit in federal district court in D.C. in which two insurance industry trade associations have challenged the HUD disparate impact rule.  The complaint in the D.C. action, which was commenced in June 2013, alleges that the text of the FHA does not proscribe facially-neutral practices that have discriminatory effects. … Continue Reading

The U.S. Supreme Court could have its third opportunity since 2012 to provide clarity with respect to disparate impact claims under the Fair Housing Act and (by analogy) the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.  After losing on appeal to the Fifth Circuit in March, the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (Texas DHCA) recently filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, asking the Court to again answer the question of whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the FHA. … Continue Reading

Although settlement discussions are continuing, the respondents in Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., filed their merits brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on October 21.  (The Township’s opening brief was filed on August 26.)  The question presented in the case is whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). … Continue Reading

As we previously reported, settlement discussions are underway in Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc.  On June 17, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case and agreed to decide whether disparate impact claims are permissible under the Fair Housing Act. 

According to a Politico report, the Township of Mount Holly has hired Washington, D.C.… Continue Reading

Last week, we reported that a lawsuit was filed on June 26 in federal district court in Washington, D.C. challenging HUD’s final rule formalizing its use of disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act (FHA).  The rule, adopted in February 2013, provides that if a practice has a “discriminatory effect” on a protected class under the FHA, HUD or a private plaintiff can establish liability under the FHA even if there is no discriminatory intent.… Continue Reading

Second time’s the charm?  For the second time in less than two years, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari today in a case that presents the question whether plaintiffs suing under the Fair Housing Act  (FHA) may bring disparate impact claims.  

Today’s grant of certiorari was in Mount Holly v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc.… Continue Reading