Court Rejects Obama Housing Bias Rule as ‘Wishful Thinking’

Lawrence Hurley, Reuters, November 3, 2014

A federal judge on Monday threw out a housing regulation issued by President Barack Obama’s administration that said racial bias claims can be based on seemingly neutral practices that may have a discriminatory effect.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said the Fair Housing Act allows for only direct discrimination claims and not those based on so-called disparate impact allegations. Leon wrote that the administration’s view that the language of the Fair Housing Act assumes that disparate impact claims are permitted “appears to be nothing more than wishful thinking on steroids.”

The ruling was a win for the American Insurance Association and other business groups that oppose disparate impact claims, which allow for a broad range of business decisions related to housing to be subject to civil rights litigation.

As an example of such a claim, the National Fair Housing Alliance sued Allstate Corp in 2012 for refusing to insure flat-roofed houses in Delaware, claiming the practice had a discriminatory effect on poor minorities most likely to live in such buildings.

The immediate impact of Leon’s decision is limited as the U.S. Supreme Court last month said it would take up a related case and is likely to decide by the end of June once and for all whether the Fair Housing Act allows for disparate impact lawsuits.

The Fair Housing Act, passed in 1968, does not specifically allow disparate impact claims but courts have permitted lawsuits making such allegations for decades. {snip}



Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • John Smith

    This so called “disparate impact” nonsense is deadly to our people.

    It is another issue that the leftist dolts love to whine about.

    Any regulation/requirement that impacts blacks negatively can be struck down.

    For example, a background check is required if you want to be a police officer, paramedic, fireman, etc.

    Then the Jesse Jackson and Al Sharptons of the world shriek, “That’s not fair, blacks have more convictions because of racism. The requirement needs to be abolished.”

    Our once great society is going down the drain…

    • propagandaoftruth

      It is a powerful, idiotic club used to hurt us.

      Illogical, based on the worst pseudo-science, the modern theory of witchcraft.

  • Frank_DeScushin

    Leon wrote that the administration’s view that the language of the Fair Housing Act assumes that disparate impact claims are permitted “appears to be nothing more than wishful thinking on steroids.”

    “Wishful thinking on steroids” is also an apt description for racial egalitarianism and Liberalism in general.

    • Oil Can Harry

      These black-robed tyrants who legislate from the bench are totalitarianism on steroids!

  • MekongDelta69

    This entire totalitarian regime, with its black muslim Marxist dictator is the very definition of ‘wishful thinking on steroids.’

    • Tarczan

      That’s how I describe the head negro in charge.

  • phorning

    It would have become impossible for any small operator to work in a housing related field if this had been upheld. The DOJ could have arbitrarily put people out of business, a rare win for sanity.

  • ncpride

    Wonder if this will have any impact on section 8 housing being forced into majority White neighborhoods?

    • Nancy

      You read my mind, NC.

      • WR_the_realist

        No, it won’t. Section 8 housing is not based on the theory of disparate impact, it’s just based on the notion that blacks shouldn’t have to live in bad neighborhoods. Of course it’s just coincidence that the bad neighborhoods are occupied mostly by blacks and the good neighborhoods are occupied mostly by whites. It’s really unfair that the whites get to live in the good neighborhoods.

        • In our almost entirely white neighborhood, the main outdoor activity is flower- and/or vegetable-gardening. There’s plenty of barbecuing during the warmer months.

          Shame on us!

          • Howard W. Campbell

            What, no stabbings or drive-by’s, that seems to be SOP for negro BBQ’s in Indianapolis.

          • WR_the_realist

            In my neighborhood it is not uncommon to hear gunfire. Just folks doing a bit of target shooting, or bagging a turkey or a deer in season. The gun grabbers will be astonished to hear that no human ever gets murdered.

          • ElGringo

            That’s very odd considering that they tell me that guns cause murder.

          • Alexandra1973

            I was at the home of some friends a few weeks ago, out in a rural area, and I heard gunfire. I asked “what was that, target practice?” One friend said that was the local hunt club.

            I told him I was from Detroit and that were I in Detroit I’d be ducking for cover. He laughed and agreed.

          • Max

            I was about to post a similarly frightening statement. There is NEVER a week go by and usually about every day someone can be heard shooting in my non-diversity, outside the city neighborhood and NO PERSON is ever injured. I’ve seen whole families shooting “assault rifles” and strangely, there were no injuries. I just don’t get it.

          • ElGringo

            No murders, rapes, robberies (gone wrong), wilding youfs, drive by shootings, or drug dealing? Wow, it sounds incredibly boring in your area. You clearly need some DIEversity in there pronto to spice things up a bit.

        • ElGringo

          Sheer coincidence I tell ya!

        • Alexandra1973

          It’s not neighborhoods that make the people, it’s people that make the neighborhoods.

          • Max

            You must’ve failed sociology.

  • superlloyd

    A small step for whites but a giant step for the judiciary. Disparate impact is a plainly absurd, selective, cultural marxist doctrine that needs to be consigned to the history books.

    Where are the suits against disparate impact in the NBA?

  • AmericanCitizen

    Wow. A court actually making a sane ruling. Perhaps the Anti-Obama feelings are finally spreading far enough where judges are realizing what this guy is doing to America.

  • Be careful. This ruling is a win for the powerful insurance industry, not for the white race per se. Not until the “wise Latina” and her ill on the High Court have their say will this issue be settled, if then. Also note that the ruling applies ONLY to the wording in the Fair Housing Act.

    Nothing I see in this ruling prevents the cowards in Congress from legislating disparate impact legislation. Ditto local regulations. Disparate impact is already the norm in San Antonio in a variety of city council enactments.

    This ruling is thus NOT the death of disparate impact. It’s an interpretation of one act at the federal level. Nothing more. We must continue the fight to take back our country or create a new one. Don’t be lulled into a false belief.

    • No one imagines that this ruling is the death of disparate impact. Disparate Impact can only be killed with a stake through the heart. Give us time..

    • MBlanc46

      I’m pretty sure that it won’t be the federal courts that save us.

    • Olorin

      I agree. The insurance industry is no friend of white people. In fact they’re doing that Mr. Burns thing with their hands, anticipating all the bling that Obamacare will throw their way as productive whites are forced to pay for the endless self-inflicted ills and hypochondrias of the aggrieved Voodoo Class.

      DI will continue to be used as a bludgeon against whites at the local and state levels. We need to be prepared to argue each case on its own terms, using logic, not emotion.

      And remember, it is the insurance, finance, and construction industries that absolutely LOVE the “creative destruction” of blacks ruining what whites created, so that it all can be leveled for re-gentrification.

      While we are trying to figure out where to live that will stay nice for the 20 years or so it takes to raise a couple of kids in safety, abundance, and orderly civilized daily life, the Creative Destruction Industry already has plans for the next 30, 50, even 100 years, and different cities and areas in their crosshairs for their Robert-Moses-type giant-scale profitable real estate games. Your life, your family’s, your community’s, and your people’s matter not one bit. In fact, you are in the way of these people’s need to destroy continually everything you create–while keeping their super-rich enclaves out of the reach of it all.

      • Max

        True enough. They were all happy to be in on the loans to unqualified applicants and then the clever ones ended up making money by the barge-load on the so-called “sub-prime loan debacle”. This is why these people finance both parties in they elections.

  • disqus_Xz3UA6obwj

    Disparate impact: The penalizing of smart people for the sake of the stupid.

    • Actually I think that’s “government”…

  • Yves Vannes

    This sound as if it is only a partial rejection of what HUD and the AG office are after. The forced invasion of the suburbs sounds as if it is still on the table: you don’t have enough low income housing nor minorities in your county so you MUST build so many units before you can continue building new market priced homes. Are you listening Marin County, Westchester County, Middlesex County…!

    • IstvanIN

      We already have that in NJ. No community can escape.

      • Anna Tree

        No state either sigh
        refugeeresettlementwatch wordpress com/tag/wyoming/

  • “The National Fair Housing Alliance sued Allstate Corp in 2012 for refusing to insure flat-roofed houses in Delaware, claiming the practice had a discriminatory effect on poor minorities most likely to live in such buildings.”

    Wow, that’s just breathtaking. It could just as readily apply to houses with no roofs, or people without houses, or (as some here have observed) murderers and rapists. Not hard to see where it leads.

  • libertarian1234

    Ignorant or out-of-touch or dim-witted blacks have some screwball idea that if they can force blacks everywhere into white society then the racial problem is solved, in spite of the fact that reality clearly shows that the more they follow that practice the more hostility and dissension it causes.

    I think if they want to continue trying that they should do so in gated communities where those like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi live.

    I’m all for that.

    • Malgus

      I’ve always marveled at that – blacks crab and BAWW about Evil Whitey ‘scrimminatin’ against them, and yet they follow us around like stray dogs, begging for handouts. No matter how far we go, they always follow. Always.

      You’d think they’d get the hint by now.

      If there were a group of people who hated my guts, preyed on my kind, brutalized us, extorted us, etc, I wouldn’t want to live anywhere near them. I’d try to live as far away from them as possible…

      Oh wait….

  • MBlanc46

    When you’re dealing with a group with an average IQ of 85 and reduced future-time orientation and impulse control, jaywalking laws have a disparate impact.

  • Diana Moon Glampers

    Disparate impact … Harrison Bergeron made judicial precedent.
    It’s so insane and terrifying that I can only shake my head and sigh.

  • De’Ontavious Jizzaiah Jones

    Disparate impact = Muerte to paraphrase old AIDS project.

  • ElGringo

    Anyone who sits around and comes up with things like ‘disparate impact’ is an absolute piece of garbage who truly has no use in a proper society. Only useful work should be rewarded and those pseudo-intellectuals that think up non-sense should be severely ridiculed and punished. I think a Soviet style GULAG system here would be nice if we ever take control. That of course would be reserved only for the minor offenders.

    • I think the whole “disparate impact” concept was deliberately invented to tie up the courts with frivolous litigation, the idea being to intimidate individuals and corporations which were honestly trying to comply with existing statutes to settle out of court for whatever they can be blackmailed into paying.

      In other words, it was created to force the current “gibs me dat” looting campaign still farther into the private sector than the plethora of Affirmative Action requirements already do.

  • No one wants to live next to black people, not even other blacks.

    White people need a country of their own.

  • I think bar none the most important SCOTUS decision this term will be Texas Housing v Inclusive Communities. If they find for Texas Housing, we will have won, in the sense of dodging a bullet.

    One other piece of good news is that if judges are lassoing in the Feds attempts to throw around “Fair Housing,” this may well mean that the two white men with Polish surnames from Pennsylvania that were sent to Federal prison because the Feds conned a jury into thinking that a bar fight had ramifications for “fair housing” will have their convictions overturned.

    Remember, murder being a crime has a disparate impact on black men.

  • Tarczan

    Flat roofs are terrible for residential construction. They constantly leak and are maintenance nightmares; it’s crazy race would be injected into something like this, but not surprising.

  • Jeff Traube

    “Fair Housing” would mean that residents have the right to practice right “free association” by restrictive covenants, and also reduce crime, noise, and unkempt properties.