Connect with us

Op-Ed

Will the Supreme Court Evict Fair Housing Law?

Published

on

Charlene Crowell

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.

###

Advice

COMMENTARY: If You Don’t Want Your ‘Black Card’ Revoked, Watch What You Bring to Holiday Dinners

From Thanksgiving to Christmas to New Year’s Day, whether it’s the dining room table or the bid whist (Spades? Uno, anyone?) table, your card may be in danger.

Published

on

The ‘aunties’ playing cards. iStock photo by Andreswd.
The ‘aunties’ playing cards. iStock photo by Andreswd.

By Wanda Ravernell
Post Staff

From the fourth week of November to the first week in January, if you are of African descent, but particularly African American, certain violations of cultural etiquette will get your ‘Black card’ revoked.

From Thanksgiving to Christmas to New Year’s Day, whether it’s the dining room table or the bid whist (Spades? Uno, anyone?) table, your card may be in danger.

It could take until Super Bowl Sunday for reinstatement.

I don’t know much about the card table, but for years I was on probation by the ‘Aunties,’ the givers and takers of Black cards.

How I Got into Trouble

It was 1970-something and I was influenced by the health food movement that emerged from the hippie era. A vegetarian (which was then considered sacrilegious by most Black people I knew) prepared me a simple meal: grated cheese over steamed broccoli, lentils, and brown rice.

I introduced the broccoli dish at the Friday night supper with my aunt and grandfather. She pronounced the bright green broccoli undone, but she ate it. (I did not, of course, try brown rice on them.)

I knew that I would be allowed back in the kitchen when she attempted the dish, but the broccoli had been cooked to death. (Y’all remember when ALL vegetables, not just greens, were cooked to mush?)

My Black card, which had been revoked was then reattained because they ate what I prepared and imitated it.

Over the decades, various transgressions have become normalized. I remember when having a smoked turkey neck instead of a ham hock in collard greens was greeted with mumblings and murmurings at both the dining room and card tables. Then came vegan versions with just olive oil (What? No Crisco? No bacon, at least?) and garlic. And now my husband stir fries his collards in a wok.

But No Matter How Things Have Changed…

At holiday meals, there are assigned tasks. Uncle Jack chopped raw onions when needed. Uncle Buddy made the fruit salad for Easter. My mother brought the greens in winter, macaroni salad in summer. Aunt Deanie did the macaroni and cheese, and the great aunts, my deceased grandmother’s sisters, oversaw the preparation of the roast beef, turkey, and ham. My father, if he were present, did the carving.

These designations/assignments were binding agreements that could stand up in a court of law. Do not violate the law of assignments by bringing some other version of a tried-and-true dish, even if you call it a new ‘cheese and noodle item’ to ‘try out.’ The auntie lawgivers know what you are trying to do. It’s called a menu coup d’état, and they are not having it.

The time for experiments is in your own home: your spouse and kids are the Guinea pigs.

My mother’s variation of a classic that I detested from that Sunday to the present was adding crushed pineapple to mashed sweet potatoes. A relative stops by, tries it, and then it can be introduced as an add-on to the standard holiday menu.

My Aunt Vivian’s concoctions from Good Housekeeping or Ladies’ Home Journal magazine also made it to the Black people’s tables all over the country in the form of a green bean casserole.

What Not to Do and How Did It Cross Your Mind?

People are, of all things holy, preparing mac ‘n’ cheese with so much sugar it tastes like custard with noodles in it.

Also showing up in the wrong places: raisins. Raisins have been reported in the stuffing (makes no sense unless it’s in a ‘sweet meats’ dish), in a pan of corn bread, and – heresy in the Black kitchen – the MAC ‘n’ CHEESE.

These are not mere allegations: There is photographic evidence of these Black card violations, but I don’t want to defame witnesses who remained present at the scene of the crimes.

The cook – bless his/her heart – was probably well-meaning, if ignorant. Maybe they got the idea from a social media influencer, much like Aunt Viv got recipes from magazines.

Thankfully, a long-winded blessing of the food at the table can give the wary attendee time to locate the oddity’s place on the table and plan accordingly.

But who knows? Innovation always prevails, for, as the old folks say, ‘waste makes want.’ What if the leftovers were cut up, dipped in breadcrumbs and deep fried? The next day, that dish might make it to the TV tray by the card table.

An older cousin – on her way to being an Auntie – in her bonnet, leggings, T-shirt, and bunny slippers and too tired to object, might try it and like it….

And if she ‘rubs your head’ after eating it, the new dish might be a winner and (Whew!) everybody, thanks God, keeps their Black cards.

Until the next time.

Continue Reading

Alameda County

Seth Curry Makes Impressive Debut with the Golden State Warriors

Seth looked comfortable in his new uniform, seamlessly fitting into the Warriors’ offensive and defensive system. He finished the night with an impressive 14 points, becoming one of the team’s top scorers for the game. Seth’s points came in a variety of ways – floaters, spot-up three-pointers, mid-range jumpers, and a handful of aggressive drives that kept the Oklahoma City Thunder defense on its heels.

Published

on

Seth Curry is a point guard on the GSW team.Photo courtesy of the Golden State Warriors.
Seth Curry is a point guard on the GSW team.Photo courtesy of the Golden State Warriors.

By Y’Anad Burrell

Tuesday night was anything but ordinary for fans in San Francisco as Seth Curry made his highly anticipated debut as a new member of the Golden State Warriors.  Seth didn’t disappoint, delivering a performance that not only showcased his scoring ability but also demonstrated his added value to the team.

At 35, the 12-year NBA veteran on Monday signed a contract to play with the Warriors for the rest of the season.

Seth looked comfortable in his new uniform, seamlessly fitting into the Warriors’ offensive and defensive system. He finished the night with an impressive 14 points, becoming one of the team’s top scorers for the game. Seth’s points came in a variety of ways – floaters, spot-up three-pointers, mid-range jumpers, and a handful of aggressive drives that kept the Oklahoma City Thunder defense on its heels.

One of the most memorable moments of the evening came before Seth even scored his first points. As he checked into the game, the Chase Center erupted into applause, with fans rising to their feet to give the newest Warrior a standing ovation.

The crowd’s reaction was a testament not only to Seth’s reputation as a sharpshooter but also to the excitement he brings to the Warriors. It was clear that fans quickly embraced Seth as one of their own, eager to see what he could bring to the team’s championship aspirations.

Warriors’ superstar Steph Curry – Seth’s brother – did not play due to an injury.  One could only imagine what it would be like if the Curry brothers were on the court together.  Magic in the making.

Seth’s debut proved to be a turning point for the Warriors. Not only did he contribute on the scoreboard, but he also brought a sense of confidence and composure to the floor.

While their loss last night, OKC 124 – GSW 112, Seth’s impact was a game-changer and there’s more yet to come.  Beyond statistics, it was clear that Seth’s presence elevated the team’s performance, giving the Warriors a new force as they look to make a deep playoff run.

Continue Reading

Activism

ESSAY: The Hidden Toll — Federal Rollbacks Threaten Black Women’s Health in California

Nutrition assistance programs, which many Black women rely on to keep their families healthy and out of the hospital, are similarly endangered. Nearly half of Black women in California receive WIC, and 47% percent use CalFresh. Cuts or cost-shifts in those programs would worsen food insecurity, especially during pregnancy and postpartum. Malnutrition or diet instability can lead to adverse birth outcomes, weakened immunity, and worse recovery from medical interventions.

Published

on

Kellie Todd Griffin, President and CEO California Black Women's Collective Empowerment Institute. CBM photo by Ian Foxx.
Kellie Todd Griffin, President and CEO California Black Women's Collective Empowerment Institute. CBM photo by Ian Foxx.

By Kellie Todd Griffin, Special to California Black Media Partners

If recent proposals in Congress to cut funding for federal social programs succeed, the downstream effects will not be abstract or distant.

They will be immediate and blunt — and felt in every clinic, every hospital, and most homes where Black women are struggling to maintain our health, care for her children, and stay afloat. In California, where Black women already navigate a terrain of deep systemic inequities, these cuts would be catastrophic.

As a lifelong advocate for Black women in California — through my research and lived experience – I’ve seen firsthand the entrenched medical and social disparities that leave too many Black women struggling to live healthy, fulfilling lives.

Across the spectrum of care — from mental, maternal, and perinatal health to chronic diseases like diabetes, hypertension, cancer, and uterine fibroids — Black women in California continue to bear a disproportionate burden.

Implicit bias in maternity care, for example, continues to be a challenge. It is a documented contributor to the fact that, in California, Black women die from pregnancy-related causes at three to four times the rate of White women.

Now, federal proposals on the table to slash funding for the very programs Black women rely on most: Medicaid (Medi-Cal in California) SNAP/CalFresh, WIC, and federal housing and income supports. As reported in the California Budget and Policy Equity on the Line report, about one in three Black women and children in California currently depend on Medi-Cal. If federal cuts were to force reductions in eligibility, benefits, or provider reimbursements, many Black women would lose access to primary care, chronic disease management, reproductive care, mental health and substance-use treatment, cancer screenings, and prenatal/postnatal services.

In a state already grappling with stark racial health disparities, removing coverage is not just harmful — it magnifies injustice. Black women in California face higher rates of poor health overall, lower life expectancy, and worse prenatal care statistics.  When the safety net frays, they will be forced into impossible trade-offs: skip medications, delay care, or incur medical debt.

Nutrition assistance programs, which many Black women rely on to keep their families healthy and out of the hospital, are similarly endangered. Nearly half of Black women in California receive WIC, and 47% percent use CalFresh. Cuts or cost-shifts in those programs would worsen food insecurity, especially during pregnancy and postpartum. Malnutrition or diet instability can lead to adverse birth outcomes, weakened immunity, and worse recovery from medical interventions.

Compounding the harm is the assault on social determinants of health. The Equity on the Line analysis shows that housing assistance, income support, and childcare subsidies are already stretched thin. Any rollback will accelerate housing instability, homelessness risk, and family stress — all of which manifest in worse health outcomes: higher hypertension, depression, chronic illness, and reduced ability to adhere to medical regimens.

California has taken important steps to protect Black women’s health. One good example is Assembly Bill, AB 2319, authored by Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City). That law strengthens the Dignity in Pregnancy and Childbirth Act by expanding and enforcing implicit bias training for providers in perinatal settings, and requiring reporting and penalties for noncompliance.

The state is also taking legal and policy action to mitigate the impact of cuts to SNAP/CalFresh food stamp benefits – like mobilizing $80 million in state funds to support food banks. It is also taking action to shore up against federal cuts to Medi-Cal.

In our communities, organizations like California Black Women’s Health Project and Black Women for Wellness are already doing the groundwork — advocating for culturally centered care, education, and infrastructure to mitigate harm.

As Californians, we must all roll up our sleeves and amplify and bolster their efforts. These organizations serve as our voice.  They are our watchdogs, too, documenting where bias persists, where systems fail, and where state enforcement is weak.

The stakes are too high for complacency. As we strategize to keep Black women healthy, we must also document and share our stories with others — every death, every untreated illness, every delayed pregnancy.

Let us be resolute, organized, hopeful, and persistent. California can be a model of how a state defends Black women’s health amid significant challenges, presenting a full vision to America, and the world, of how we can make health justice a reality and make California healthier for all our communities.

About the Author

Kellie Todd Griffin, President and CEO of the California Black Women’s Collective Empowerment Institute.  With a deep commitment to equity and justice, she champions initiatives that amplify the voices and influence of Black women across California. Known for her strategic insight and passion for community empowerment, Kellie is a driving force in fostering systemic change and collective progress.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.