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
fair housing
Update on certiorari petition in Texas FHA case
By Barbara S. Mishkin on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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…
Another insurance industry trade association group challenges the HUD disparate impact rule
By Barbara S. Mishkin on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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. It…
Another Supreme Court disparate impact case?
By Barbara S. Mishkin on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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…
Mt. Holly Gardens files merits brief
By Barbara S. Mishkin on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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…
HUD seeks stay of disparate impact suit
By Barbara S. Mishkin on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
When we wrote about the lawsuit filed on June 26, 2013 against HUD by two insurance industry trade groups challenging HUD’s final rule formalizing its use of disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), we suggested that HUD might ask the court to stay further proceedings in the case pending a decision by…
Parties in Mt. Holly case hire Supreme Court advocates
By Alan S. Kaplinsky on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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…
More on new disparate impact suit against HUD
By Alan S. Kaplinsky on
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…
Settlement discussions underway in Mt. Holly
By Alan S. Kaplinsky on
Since the petition for certiorari in Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc. was filed last year, we have raised the possibility that, even if the Supreme Court granted certiorari, the case might settle before the Court had a chance to rule on the merits, like City of St.
Supreme Court grants cert (again) in FHA disparate impact case
By Alan S. Kaplinsky on
Posted in Fair Lending, Regulatory and Enforcement
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…