Archives

Mt. Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, the case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court which addresses the question of whether a party can establish a discriminatory housing practice under the Fair Housing Act by showing that minorities have been disproportionately affected (the “disparate impact” test) — as opposed to showing an intent to discriminate — is nearing a settlement.

Philly.com is reporting that the parties have reached a tentative settlement, with signatures awaiting. If completed before Dec. 4, the parties will not have to proceed with argument before the high court on that date.

Read more about the case here.

The Supreme Court agreed today to decide whether, under the Fair Housing Act, proof that a residential property practice had a disparate impact on a particular group suffices for a claim of discrimination, or whether challengers must prove instead intent to discriminate.

In the case, Township of Mount Holly v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action — which will be argued in the fall – African-American and Hispanic residents of a neighborhood pegged for demolition and redevelopment in Mount Holly, N.J., sued to block the project, saying it targeted a predominantly minority area.

As noted here , the housing act does not explicitly cover disparate impact claims, unlike other anti-discrimination laws.  The outcome could affect other laws as well, including one that prohibits discrimination in lending and is enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.