The Supreme Court Put A Dent In The Middle of The Fair Housing Act
By: C. Harrison/June 28, 2015/3:50AM
New York, NY—-A few months ago I wrote up a tiny vignette on a pamphlet called “Rent is Theft,” an insight on what was once Bushwick and what up rooted this area of Brooklyn. To say the least it was fascinating. Today, this announcement brings some solace to some and to those that have been in the trenches fighting the war on fair housing polices.
Some called it an historic win, in a 5-4 ruling the Supreme Court steer down the Fair Housing Act of 1968, a measure pass not too long after Dr Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated.
The Supreme Court focused and cited how the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs allocated tax credits for affordable housing. The citation was where the state of Texas approved the construction of affordable housing along racial lines. In other words, affordable housing was only being build in minority neighborhoods, where renters and minority low income residents could only get those houses in those neighborhoods and vouchers could only be used in said neighborhoods and not venture outside into the white suburbs.
The Supreme Court decided whether to uphold a central protection under the Fair Housing Act, which has been used for over four decades to address widespread discrimination in housing and has been unanimously endorsed by our nation’s appellate courts. That protection often referred to as the “disparate impact” standard , ensured that banks, landlords and other housing providers use polices that apply fairly to all persons. Polices that seem neutral in theory can exclude or segregate particular communities in practice.
The protection under the Fair Housing Act, allowed the court to recognize and prevent harmful and inequitable polices so that everyone is treated fairly, according to the courts.
The Fair Housing Act protects all Americans from discrimination in housing and the inequality that results from segregation. Under the Act, it is illegal to discriminate based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability or familial status.
Today, we took a giant leap into the future and to preserve precedent civil rights polices for generations to come. Had this case law not pass, the significance of the civil rights law for the Fair Housing Act, could have been dealt a blow. The preciseness of the ruling sends a message to those that intentionally or unintentionally discriminate against minorities; that the practice has to stop. It is or as of today, was a measure used by FHA, banks, housing agencies, and some landlords.
