National

Scalia Could Be Surprise Vote in Supreme Court Housing Case

Published

11 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

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: The National Protest Must Be Accompanied with Our Votes

Just as Trump is gathering election data like having the FBI take all the election data in Georgia from the 2020 election, so must we organize in preparation for the coming primary season to have the right people on ballots in each Republican district, so that we can regain control of the House of Representatives and by doing so, restore the separation of powers and balance that our democracy is being deprived of.

Published

6 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

Dr. John E. Warren, Publisher San Diego Voice & Viewpoint Newspaper. File photo..

By Dr. John E. Warren, Publisher San Diego Voice & Viewpoint Newspaper

As thousands of Americans march every week in cities across this great nation, it must be remembered that the protest without the vote is of no concern to Donald Trump and his administration.

In every city, there is a personal connection to the U.S. Congress. In too many cases, the member of Congress representing the people of that city and the congressional district in which it sits, is a Republican. It is the Republicans who are giving silent support to the destructive actions of those persons like the U.S. Attorney General, the Director of Homeland Security, and the National Intelligence Director, who are carrying out the revenge campaign of the President rather than upholding the oath of office each of them took “to Defend The Constitution of the United States.”

In California, the primary comes in June 2026. The congressional races must be a priority just as much as the local election of people has been so important in keeping ICE from acquiring facilities to build more prisons around the country.

“We the People” are winning this battle, even though it might not look like it. Each of us must get involved now, right where we are.

In this Black History month, it is important to remember that all we have accomplished in this nation has been “in spite of” and not “because of.” Frederick Douglas said, “Power concedes nothing without a struggle.”

Today, the struggle is to maintain our very institutions and history. Our strength in this struggle rests in our “collectiveness.” Our newspapers and journalists are at the greatest risk. We must not personally add to the attack by ignoring those who have been our very foundation, our Black press.

Are you spending your dollars this Black History Month with those who salute and honor contributions by supporting those who tell our stories? Remember that silence is the same as consent and support for the opposition. Where do you stand and where will your dollars go?

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Congresswoman Simon Votes Against Department of Homeland Security, ICE Funding

“They need accountability. Republicans already gave these agencies an unprecedented $170 billion for immigration enforcement, funding they have used to conduct raids at schools, separate families, and deploy a masked paramilitary who refuse to identify themselves on American streets. This bill gives them more funding without a single reform to stop unconstitutional, immoral abuses,” she said.

Published

6 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon (D-CA-12). File photo.

By Post Staff

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon (D-CA-12) released a statement after voting against legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which supports Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB).

“Today, I voted NO on legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 13, 2026.

“ICE and CBP do not need more funding to terrorize communities or kill more people,” she said in the media release.

“They need accountability. Republicans already gave these agencies an unprecedented $170 billion for immigration enforcement, funding they have used to conduct raids at schools, separate families, and deploy a masked paramilitary who refuse to identify themselves on American streets. This bill gives them more funding without a single reform to stop unconstitutional, immoral abuses,” she said.

“The American people are demanding change. Poll after poll of Americans’ opinions show overwhelming support for requiring ICE agents to wear body cameras and prohibiting them from hiding their faces during enforcement actions. This is the bare minimum transparency standard, and this funding legislation does not even meet this low bar,” Simon said.

“Republicans in Congress are not serious about reining in these lawless agencies. Their refusal to make meaningful changes to the DHS funding bill has consequences that go beyond immigration enforcement. TSA agents who keep our airports safe and FEMA workers who help our communities recover from disasters are stuck in limbo due to Republican inaction.

“The Constitution does not have an exception for immigrants. Every person on American soil has rights, and federal agencies must respect them. The East Bay has made clear at the Alameda County and city level that we will hold the line against a violent ICE force and support our immigrant communities – I will continue to hold the line and our values with my votes in Congress.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Post Newspaper Invites NNPA to Join Nationwide Probate Reform Initiative

The Post’s Probate Reform Group meets the first Thursday of every month via Zoom and invites the public to attend. The Post is making the initiative national and will submit information from its monthly meeting to the NNPA to educate, advocate, and inform its readers.

Published

6 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Tanya Dennis

The National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) represents the Black press with over 200 newspapers nationwide.

Last night the Post announced that it is actively recruiting the Black press to inform the public that there is a probate “five-alarm fire” occurring in Black communities and invited every Black newspaper starting from the Birmingham Times in Alabama to the Milwaukee Times Weekly in Wisconsin, to join the Post in our “Year of Action” for probate reform.

Reporter Tanya Dennis says, “The adage that ‘When America catches a cold, Black folks catch the flu” is too true in practice; that’s why we’re engaging the Black Press to not only warn, but educate the Black community regarding the criminal actions we see in probate court: Thousands are losing generational wealth to strangers. It’s a travesty that happens daily.”

Venus Gist, a co-host of the reform group, states, “ Unfortunately, people are their own worst enemy when it comes to speaking with loved ones regarding their demise. It’s an uncomfortable subject that most avoid, but they do so at their peril. The courts rely on dissention between family members, so I encourage not only a will and trust [be created] but also videotape the reading of your documents so you can show you’re of sound mind.”

In better times, drafting a will was enough; then a trust was an added requirement to ‘iron-clad’ documents and to assure easy transference of wealth.

No longer.

As the courts became underfunded in the last 20 years, predatory behavior emerged to the extent that criminality is now occurring at alarming rates with no oversight, with courts isolating the conserved, and, I’ve heard, many times killing conservatees for profit. Plundering the assets of estates until beneficiaries are penniless is also common.”

Post Newspaper Publisher Paul Cobb says, “The simple solution is to avoid probate at all costs. If beneficiaries can’t agree, hire a private mediator and attorney to work things out. The moment you walk into court, you are vulnerable to the whims of the court. Your will and trust mean nothing.”

Zakiya Jendayi, a co-host of the Probate Reform Group and a victim herself, says, “In my case, the will and trust were clear that I am the beneficiary of the estate, but the opposing attorney said I used undue influence to make myself beneficiary. He said that without proof, and the judge upheld the attorney’s baseless assertion. In court, the will and trust is easily discounted.”

The Black press reaches out to 47 million Black Americans with one voice. The power of the press has never been so important as it is now in this national movement to save Black generational wealth from predatory attorneys, guardians and judges.

The next probate reform meeting is on March 5, from 7 – 9 p.m. PST. Zoom Details:
Meeting ID: 825 0367 1750
Passcode: 475480

All are welcome.