Op-Ed

Will the Supreme Court Evict Fair Housing Law?

Published

11 years ago

January 27, 2015

By Charlene Crowell
NNPA Columnist

Although a series of civil rights laws were enacted in the 1960s, in the 21st Century many of these victories continue to face legal challenges. On January 21, one such challenge was heard by the United States Supreme Court. By the time the Justices rule in the case of Texas Department of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project, the nation’s Fair Housing Act of 1968 will either be gutted or strengthened.

Lawyers argued whether the Fair Housing Act was intended to apply only to intentional discrimination or whether policies and practices that lead to exclusionary racial patterns are within the scope of the law, causing “disparate impact.”

In 2008, The Inclusive Project, a nonprofit organization that advocates fair and affordable housing in the Dallas metro area, sued the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. It charged the state agency with perpetuating racial disparities violating fair housing by the way it used an indirect federal subsidy called Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs). The tax credits, used across the country to support permanently affordable rental housing options for low-income families, were alleged in Texas to target minority areas while excluding them in predominantly White ones.

In March 2014, the U.S. Federal Fifth Circuit of Appeals agreed with The Project. Undaunted by the appellate decision, in May 2014, the Texas agency petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court.

Since then, amicus or “friend of the court” briefs have been filed by a number of diverse organizations that include AARP, Hope Enterprise Corporation, Howard University School of Law Housing Clinic, Judicial Watch, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, National Black Law Students Association, the National Fair Housing Alliance and the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL).

Fair housing advocates have raised their voices and organized protests to mount pressure that conveys just how important fair housing is to the nation’s citizens and its economy.

Speaking at a January 21 midday rally organized by the National Fair Housing Alliance and held on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court, Nikitra Bailey, senior vice-president with CRL said, “Today the question before the Supreme Court is a simple one: Will the court stand on the side of justice and fairness by upholding disparate impact as a critical tool under the Fair Housing Act, or will it take a step backwards in our nation’s storied history and allow rampant discrimination in housing and finance markets to go unchecked?”

“The answer for the court should be easy,” continued Bailey. “Disparate impact is a longstanding safeguard for fairness – it simply requires that policymakers, banks and other housing service providers pick the fairest option to avoid discrimination.”

Myron Orfield, a professor of law and director of the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity at the University of Minnesota, was equally direct on the issue in a recent blog.

“If the Supreme Court holds that there is no disparate impact cause of action under the Fair Housing Act, it will remove the single most effective tool available to fight discrimination and segregation,” concluded Orfield.

In recent years, two other cases with essentially the same arguments were settled before the Roberts Court could rule. In this third case, the likelihood of a settlement appears remote.

Key federal agencies have fully embraced disparate impact as central to their work. For example, in a 2012 address before the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Richard Cordray, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said, “We cannot afford to tolerate practices, intentional or not, that unlawfully price out or cut off segments of the population from credit markets.”

Less than a year later in February 2013, HUD issued its own disparate impact rule holding that housing discrimination and lending occurs not only by intent; but also by effect. At the time, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said, “Through the issuance of this Rule, HUD is reaffirming its commitment to enforcing the Fair Housing Act in a consistent and uniform manner. This will ensure the continued strength of one of the most important tools for exposing and ending housing discrimination.”

Earlier mortgage research by CRL found that racial disparities really meant that communities of color bore a disproportionately large share of foreclosures, lost wealth, and deteriorating quality of life. African-American and Latino borrowers were, respectively, 2.8 and 2.3 times as likely to receive a mortgage loan with a prepayment penalty – even though many of these borrowers could have qualified for more affordable and sustainable loans. At the height of the foreclosure crisis, borrowers of color were also foreclosed at rates nearly double that experienced by Whites.
With such broad and strong support for disparate impact and research revealing its harms, if the Supreme Court takes the more narrow approach of intentional discrimination as it relates to the Fair Housing Act, the multiple and rippling effects may reverse fair housing’s hard-fought gains.

As Marc Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League recently wrote, “I think all fair-minded people would agree that we should not allow these types of discriminatory outcomes to persist. Private civil rights attorneys, state Attorney Generals, federal enforcement agencies and others continue to work diligently to ensure that those practices are a part of the past – and not our future.”

Charlene Crowell is a communications manager with the Center for Responsible Lending. She can be reached at Charlene.crowell@responsiblelending.org.

###

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Up Next

Neither Obama Nor Republicans Have Vision

Don't Miss

Terror in the Name of Religion

Reporter II

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

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.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

COMMENTARY: The Biases We Don’t See — Preventing AI-Driven Inequality in Health Care

For decades, medicine promoted false assumptions about Black bodies. Black patients were told they had lower lung capacity, and medical devices adjusted their results accordingly. That practice was not broadly reversed until 2021. Up until 2022, a common medical formula used to measure how well a person’s kidneys were working automatically gave Black patients a higher score simply because they were Black. On paper, this made their kidneys appear healthier than they truly were. As a result, kidney disease was sometimes detected later in Black patients, delaying critical treatment and referrals.

Published

6 days ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, M.D (D-San Diego). File photo.

By Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, M.D., Special to California Black Media Partners

Technology is sold to us as neutral, objective, and free of human flaws. We are told that computers remove emotion, bias, and error from decision-making. But for many Black families, lived experience tells a different story. When technology is trained on biased systems, it reflects those same biases and silently carries them forward.

We have seen this happen across multiple industries. Facial recognition software has misidentified Black faces at far higher rates than White faces, leading to wrongful police encounters and arrests. Automated hiring systems have filtered out applicants with traditionally Black names because past hiring data reflected discriminatory patterns. Financial algorithms have denied loans or offered worse terms to Black borrowers based on zip codes and historical inequities, rather than individual creditworthiness. These systems did not become biased on their own. They were trained on biased data.

Healthcare is not immune.

These biases were not limited to software or medical devices. Dangerous myths persisted that Black people feel less pain, contributing to undertreatment and delayed care. These beliefs were embedded in modern training and practice, not distant history. Those assumptions shaped the data that now feeds medical technology. When biased clinical practices form the basis of algorithms, the risk is not hypothetical. The bias can be learned, automated, and scaled.

For us in the Black community, this creates understandable fear and mistrust. Many families already carry generational memories of medical discrimination, from higher maternal mortality to lower life expectancy to being dismissed or unheard in clinical settings. Adding AI biases could make our community even more apprehensive about the healthcare system.

As a physician, I know how much trust patients place in the healthcare system during their most vulnerable moments. As a Black woman, I understand how bias can shape experiences in ways that are often invisible to those who do not live them. As a mother of two Black children, I think constantly about the systems that will shape their health and well-being. As a legislator, I believe it is our responsibility to confront emerging risks before they become widespread harm.

That is why I am the author of Senate Bill (SB) 503. This bill aims to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare by requiring developers and users of AI systems to identify, mitigate, and monitor biased impacts in their outputs to reduce racial and other disparities in clinical decision-making and patient care.

Currently under consideration in the State Assembly, SB 503 was not written to slow innovation. In fact, I encourage it. But it is our duty must ensure that every tool we in the healthcare field helps patients rather than harms them.

The health of our families depends on it.

About the Author

Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D–San Diego) is a physician and public health advocate representing California’s 39th Senate District.