June 25, 2015      5:26 PM
High Court strikes down state objections to disparate-impact housing claims
Indirectly rebuked the practice of Texas House members to veto the placement of subsidized housing in their local neighborhoods
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the Fair Housing Act and indirectly rebuked
a practice that’s given Texas House members the right to
veto the placement of subsidized housing in their local neighborhoods.
Then-Attorney
General Greg Abbott filed a bold
appeal of a disparate-impact claims case to the nation’s top court after losing
at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal was bold because
circuit decisions have generally favored the idea that discrimination can be
proven indirectly by outcomes.
Justice
Anthony Kennedy, in a 5-4 opinion,
wrote that the court had upheld disparate-impact claims in other areas of the
law, such as employment practices. Texas had argued that discrimination must be
outright or explicit.
“Together,
Griggs holds and the plurality in Smith instructs that antidiscrimination
laws must be construed to encompass disparate-impact claims when their text
refers to the consequences of actions and not just to the mindset of actors,
and where that interpretation is consistent with statutory purpose,” Kennedy
wrote. “These cases also teach that disparate-impact liability must be limited
so employers and other regulated entities are able to make the practical
business choices and profit-related that sustain a vibrant and dynamic-free
enterprise system.”
By Kimberly Reeves
|