Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This created a segregated housing pattern. The case was based on discriminatory impact (rather than intent), and the standards governing that type of claim differed among courts. Graves, however, recognized that the HUD had recently promulgated rules governing disparate impact FHA claims and expressly adopted the rules.
The disparate impact theory has application also in the housing context under Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, also known as the Fair Housing Act. The ten federal appellate courts that have addressed the issue have all determined that one may establish a Fair Housing Act violation through the disparate impact theory of liability.
The Initiative's mission is to recruit and train veterans of the US armed services for careers in housing management, with an emphasis on affordable housing. [4] NCHM has pledged $1,000,000 in training and certification scholarships for veterans not currently employed in the housing industry.
Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 576 U.S. 519 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court analyzed whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. [1]
There have been calls for HUD to use disparate impact as a measure of housing discrimination. HUD's disparate impact rule was strengthened in 2013 and upheld in a court case in 2015. However, in 2020, HUD issued its final disparate impact rule, which shifted the burden of proof of discrimination to the victims of housing discrimination. [18]
In disparate impact claims, a prima facie case of discrimination is established by showing that the challenged practice of the defendant actually or predictably results in racial discrimination. [18] This analysis focuses on facially neutral policies that may have a discriminatory effect.
Metropolitan Housing Development Corp, 429 U.S. 252 (1977), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with a zoning ordinance that in a practical way barred families of various socio-economic, and ethno-racial backgrounds from residing in a neighborhood. The Court held that the ordinance was constitutional because there ...
Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on March 30, 2005. It concerned the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) and the disparate impact theory.