National

Scalia Could Be Surprise Vote in Supreme Court Housing Case

Published

12 years ago

January 22, 2015

This Aug. 30, 2014, photo shows the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs in Austin, Texas. The Obama administration may need the vote of a frequent conservative antagonist on the Supreme Court to preserve a decades-old strategy for fighting housing discrimination. Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2015, appeared at times to side with the administration and civil rights groups during arguments over the reach of the landmark Fair Housing Act of 1968, a case that otherwise seemed to split the court along ideological lines. Scalia seemed to agree with the court's four liberal justices that the law can be used to ban housing or lending practices without any proof of intent to discriminate. The court is considering a challenge from Texas officials to the use of so-called disparate impact lawsuits, which allege that even race-neutral lending or housing policies can have a harmful effect on minority groups. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

This Aug. 30, 2014, photo shows the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs in Austin, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

SAM HANANEL, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration may need the vote of a frequent conservative antagonist on the Supreme Court to preserve a decades-old strategy for fighting housing discrimination.

Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday appeared at times to side with the administration and civil rights groups during arguments over the reach of the landmark Fair Housing Act of 1968, a case that otherwise seemed to split the court along ideological lines.

Scalia seemed to agree with the court’s four liberal justices that the law can be used to ban housing or lending practices without any proof of intent to discriminate. The court is considering a challenge from Texas officials to the use of so-called disparate impact lawsuits, which allege that even race-neutral lending or housing policies can have a harmful effect on minority groups.

Scalia said Congress seemed to have such lawsuits in mind when it passed the law in the 1960s, and later amendments in 1988, to eliminate segregation in housing.

“I find it hard to read those two together in any other way than there is such a thing as disparate impact,” Scalia told Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller.

Civil rights organizations have speculated that conservatives on the court took up the case to knock out such lawsuits, which lower courts have uniformly allowed for 40 years. Their only hope is that Scalia or, perhaps Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is sometimes a swing vote, will side with the court’s four liberals to uphold the practice.

Later in the hourlong argument, Scalia made comments critical of disparate impact when he told Michael Daniel, lawyer for a Texas fair housing group, that “racial disparity is not racial discrimination.”

“The fact that the NFL is largely black players is not discrimination,” Scalia said.

The issue has galvanized critics, including banks, mortgage companies and conservative groups, who say federal housing law should punish only intentional acts of discrimination. Two similar cases out of Minnesota and New Jersey reached the court in recent years, but those were settled in 2012 and 2013 just weeks before oral argument — in one case at the behest of the Obama administration.

The latest case involves an appeal from officials accused of awarding federal housing tax credits in a way that steered low-income housing to mostly poor, black neighborhoods in Dallas and generally kept the units out of wealthier white enclaves.

A Dallas-based fair housing group, Inclusive Communities Project Inc., sued the Texas Department of Housing and Community Development in 2008. The group alleged that agency policies were keeping Dallas neighborhoods segregated and denying blacks a chance to move into safer neighborhoods with better schools.

The housing advocacy group couldn’t prove Texas officials were intentionally biased. But a federal appeals court said the group could use statistics to show that the policies still harmed black residents in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

Chief Justice John Roberts was among those expressing serious doubts about the tactic.

“It is very difficult to decide what impact is good and what impact is bad,” Roberts said. What if one community wants to build low-income housing to revitalize minority neighborhoods, while another wants to integrate white areas, he asked. “Which is the bad thing to do?”

Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, who argued in favor of disparate impact, said both plans may ultimately pass muster. As in the Texas case, Verrilli said a community still has a chance to justify a race-neutral policy that has a negative impact on minorities.

But Roberts pressed Verrilli with the same question three times, complaining that he wasn’t getting an answer.

Verrilli said such cases were outliers and said typical cases “in the heartland” such as zoning restrictions or occupancy rules are more straightforward.

In his only comment, Justice Anthony Kennedy said it seemed “very odd to me” that disparate impact could apply to either case.

Scott Keller, the Texas Solicitor General, stressed there was no clear language authorizing discriminatory-impact lawsuits when the housing law was passed in 1968. While employment discrimination laws seem to allow it, he said it is not explicitly covered under the Fair Housing Act.

But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called that argument “a little artificial” because the theory was not mainstream until the Supreme Court approved its use for employment discrimination cases in 1971.

Justice Stephen Breyer noted that every appeals court to consider the question for the past 40 years has found disparate impact acceptable in the housing context.

“Why, when something is so well-established throughout the United States, should the court come in and change it?” he asked Keller.

Keller said disparate impact claims would essentially force the state to make race-conscious decisions to avoid liability.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

In Tamir Rice Case, Many Errors by Cleveland Police, Then a Fatal One

Don't Miss

1st Racial-Impact Law Seen as Having Modest Effect in Iowa

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Business

Oakland Children’s Hospital Workers and Patients Rally for Pediatric Medical Care

OAKLAND POST — “Children who go through a bone marrow transplant are immunocompromised, meaning that their immune system has been wiped out,” and having to take public transport to San Francisco exposes patients to the risk of getting a dangerous infection, said Paola Portillo, a social worker.

Published

52 minutes ago

July 26, 2026

bpusa-syndication

Staff and family members of patients at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland in Oakland, Calif., hold signs during a rally on Thursday, July 9, 2026. Rally participants protested the relocation of specialized care clinics to the hospital's San Francisco campus. Photo by Kayla Chan/Bay City News.

By Post Staff

Staff, patients’ families, and supporters held a rally recently at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital in Oakland to protest the hospital’s decision to relocate specialized treatment clinics to San Francisco.

Protesters said the move is creating barriers for patients to access care and raised concerns over whether the hospital was appropriately using funds partially designated for pediatric services.

In response, hospital officials say they are concentrating resources for highly specialized procedures so patients can receive the highest quality of care.

One of the speakers at the rally, Paola Portillo, a social worker, said the hospital started transferring the clinics a year ago when UCSF Health integrated with the Children’s Hospital Oakland, located at 747 52nd St. in North Oakland.

According to Portillo, patients who need bone marrow treatments and interventional radiology are forced to travel to UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital in San Francisco, which can be dangerous, she said.

“Children who go through a bone marrow transplant are immunocompromised, meaning that their immune system has been wiped out,” and having to take public transport to San Francisco exposes patients to the risk of getting a dangerous infection, she said.

UCSF spokesperson Kristen Bole says the move improves the hospital’s quality of care, giving bone marrow treatment (BMT) as an example.

“Inpatient BMT is a highly complex service where patient volume, specialized infrastructure, faculty coverage and 24/7 support are essential,” she said in a statement. “Concentrating non-gene therapy inpatient BMT care at Mission Bay allows us to provide the safest and most sustainable model for patients and families.”

Hospital officials also emphasized that moving care was not a one-way street. Beginning this month, patients admitted for rehabilitative treatment have been directed to the children’s hospital in Oakland, Bole said.

Speakers at the rally also claimed UCSF has not been transparent about how it has allocated funding from 2020’s Measure C, a measure that created a half-percent sales tax that partially funded pediatric health care at the children’s hospital.

“The community fought so hard for Measure C because every child deserves access to lifesaving, pediatric, high-quality care right here in Oakland,” said Agnes Cho, a policy advisor speaking on behalf of Alameda County Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bas. “The funding should go towards strengthening care for children right here in Oakland.”

Protesters also said UCSF’s $3.3 billion endowment has been misused. Last October, the University Professional & Technical Employees union published a report on the University of California’s spending, which highlighted projects such as the $4.3 billion UCSF Helen Diller Medical Center at Parnassus Heights.

“What I have a problem with is saying the kids from the East Bay have to go to San Francisco to get care, so that UC can build a fancy hospital for its richest patients in San Francisco,” said union President Dan Russell.

The UCSF spokesperson said UCSF has been investing in its Oakland campus, explaining that upgrades that are expected to be completed in 2030 at a cost of $1.6 billion.

“Oakland is central to our pediatric health system, and we are making the largest investment in the campus’ history,” the spokeswoman said. “We do not make investments of this scale in a campus, workforce or community we plan to leave behind.”

This article includes coverage from Bay City News Service and media releases.

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

Black History

Opinion: When Politicians Start Sanitizing One Chapter of History, They’re Coming After The Whole Book

OAKLAND POST — The White House recently released a report criticizing the Smithsonian for supposedly promoting “anti-White activism” and other ideological sins. Buried inside is something even more troubling. The report argues Americans shouldn’t think of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 primarily as a racist law. Instead, we’re told it was about national security.

Published

1 hour ago

July 26, 2026

bpusa-syndication

AI-generated illustration created by Open AI.

By Emil Amok Guillermo

I came to Winnipeg to perform my one-man show, 69, Emil Amok: Anchorman—The News Made Me Do It.

I didn’t expect to leave with another lesson about America.

It came over dim sum.

After the show, Shirley—a Chinese Canadian—and her friend Chris, a Sri Lankan-Mauritian Canadian—insisted on taking me to a restaurant in Winnipeg’s Chinatown.

A Filipino American. A Chinese Canadian. A Sri Lankan-Mauritian Canadian.

The United Nations, if it served dumplings.

Then Shirley told me about her father.

He arrived from China at 14 years old, speaking no English. The school put him in second grade just to learn the language. Once he caught up, they skipped him to ninth grade.

Two years later, he was working.

He opened a restaurant.

It burned down.

He opened another.

Eventually he bought a café in rural Manitoba serving chop suey, burgers, steaks and fries.

The Good Way Café became the place everybody gathered. Rock and roll played from the jukebox until midnight.

Her father, Arthur Mar, built a business, employed people and became part of his community.

Sound familiar?

It should.

It’s the same immigrant story Americans love to celebrate.

Until politics gets involved.

Because before Arthur Mar could build anything, Canada made him pay a $500 Chinese head tax—a fortune in the 1920s.

When that didn’t keep enough Chinese out, Canada passed its own Chinese Exclusion Act.

Different country.

Same racism.

Canada has spent decades admitting what it did.

The Trump administration wants America to do the opposite.

The White House recently released a report criticizing the Smithsonian for supposedly promoting “anti-White activism” and other ideological sins.

Buried inside is something even more troubling.

The report argues Americans shouldn’t think of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 primarily as a racist law.

Instead, we’re told it was about national security.

Funny how those two words have always been available whenever politicians want to discriminate against somebody.

Black Americans have heard that song before.

Slave patrols became public safety.

Jim Crow became states’ rights.

Mass incarceration became law and order.

Same melody.

Different verse.

History has a way of putting racism in a respectable suit.

When politicians begin sanitizing one chapter of history, they’re coming after the whole book.

Communities of color don’t have identical histories.

But we recognize familiar tactics.

About the Author

Emil Guillermo is an award-winning journalist, commentator and comic monologist. He performs “69, Emil Amok: Anchorman—The News Made Me Do It” at the Winnipeg Fringe Festival, July 16–26.

Get Tix: https://www.winnipegfringe.com/performer-detail.aspx?kw=Emil+Amok+Productions

Follow him at YouTube.com/@emilamok1.

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

Black History

Beyond Politics: California Legislators Across Party Lines Celebrate Lori Wilson at 50

OAKLAND POST — Organized by Assemblymembers Anamarie Ávila Farías (D-Martinez) and Stephanie Nguyen (D-Elk Grove), the celebration featured a video filled with birthday wishes from Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as Capitol staff, honoring Wilson, who serves as chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee and is a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus.

Published

1 hour ago

July 26, 2026

bpusa-syndication

Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City). File photo.

By Tanu Henry, California Black Media

In a Capitol more often defined by policy debates and partisan differences, California lawmakers recently offered a reminder that respect, friendship and collegiality can still rise above politics.

On July 17, legislators from both sides of the aisle came together to celebrate Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson’s (D-Suisun City) 50th birthday with a surprise tribute that reflected the admiration she has earned from colleagues across the political spectrum.

Organized by Assemblymembers Anamarie Ávila Farías (D-Martinez) and Stephanie Nguyen (D-Elk Grove), the celebration featured a video filled with birthday wishes from Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as Capitol staff, honoring Wilson, who serves as chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee and is a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus.

“I hope you’re feeling the love from the Legislature, Lori, and I’m so honored to be able to serve with you and have you as my seatmate,” Ávila Farías said in the video. “You’re an amazing human being, and I feel so privileged to celebrate this milestone with you. Happy birthday.”

Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley), a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus, thanked Wilson for her leadership and service.

“Happy Birthday, Lori. Thanks for what you stand for and all the work that you’ve done in the Legislature.”

Republican Assemblymember David J. Tangipa (R-Fresno) also joined in the celebration.

“You are a rock star. Happy, happy birthday and have a great one.”

Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) praised Wilson’s character and leadership.

“Hugest of happiest birthdays of all time, dear Lori. You are such a ray of sunshine in the Legislature; you are an adult in the room; you are a badass warrior, and we love you and appreciate you,” said Wicks.

Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), also a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus, reflected on Wilson’s future.

“Wishing you a very happy 50th birthday, Lori. You are an amazing woman, and there’s so much more to come for you,” she said.

Assemblymember Sade Elhawary (D-Los Angeles), a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus, added:

“Lori, we are so happy that you are the fearless queen that you are. Happy 50th. Enjoy. You deserve it.”

Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) also shared his appreciation.

“Happy birthday. I believe you’re an amazing individual, an amazing person, and I love your housing policies, so thank you. Again, happy birthday. Have some fun today.”

Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton) closed with words celebrating both Wilson’s milestone and her wisdom.

“There’s a saying that when you become older you become wiser, but I want to say that you’re already there.”

At a time when political divisions often dominate the public conversation, the celebration served as a reminder that personal relationships and mutual respect continue to exist inside California’s Capitol. For one afternoon, party labels took a back seat as lawmakers from across the aisle came together to honor a colleague whose leadership, professionalism and friendship have earned admiration well beyond partisan lines.