The New York Times
(Editor’s note: Opinion pieces are posted for discussion purposes only.)
Housing discrimination doesn’t have to be intentional to be illegal. That is the point of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday interpreting the Fair Housing Act of 1968 in accord with clear congressional intent, and preserving a well-established and critical tool in the long-running battle to ensure a more integrated society.
By a vote of 5-4, Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by the four more liberal justices, ruled that the law allows plaintiffs to challenge government or private policies that have a discriminatory effect, without having to show evidence of intentional discrimination.
Comments by Rose Law Group Partner Cameron Carter:
“While recognizing that we must continue to make efforts to eliminate discrimination against certain groups and individuals, the court provided additional guidance to lower courts and made clear that businesses must have latitude to make practical business choices and profit-related decisions with regards to where and how to invest in housing. These are fundamental principles to our free-enterprise system, and we think this case will help provide some clarity to those concerned about potential disparate impact claims under the Fair Housing Act.”
