Articles

Will the third time be the charm for having the U.S. Supreme Court decide whether disparate impact discrimination claims are allowed under the Fair Housing Act?  Later this month, on September 29th, the Court will decide whether to accept review in a case presenting that issue.  The case is called Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v ...

Remember Magner v. Gallagher, the case out of Minnesota that challenged whether there was a disparate impact cause of action under the Fair Housing Act?  Note: There isn't. Remember when the Obama Administration pressured the City of St. Paul to voluntarily dismiss Magner after it had been granted certiorari by the Supreme Court?  All we knew at th ...

Today the Supreme Court asked the U.S. Solicitor General to provide the government's views on whether the federal Fair Housing Act encompasses disparate impact claims.  The Court had agreed to rule on that issue last Term, but the case providing that question settled without a decision.  The case now being considered by the Court is called Mount Ho ...

Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review a case handed down by the Third Circuit called Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens.  The case concerns whether the federal Fair Housing Act encompasses disparate impact claims.  The Center for Equal Opportunity joined PLF in its brief. ...

Sigh.  Magner v. Gallagher, which was set to be argued by the US Supreme Court later this month, appears to have been dismissed.  Unfortunately, this means that the 8th Circuit decision, which invented a disparate impact claim under the Fair Housing Act out of whole cloth, is still good law. PLF had filed an amicus brief (joined by the Cato Instit ...

The title of this article is a bit off. For more on PLF's role in Magner v. Gallagher go here. ...

Two readers responded to my recent post regarding PLF's brief in Magner v. Gallagher.  The gist of the comments is the same: What St. Paul is doing here is outrageous!  How can PLF say it's in favor of property rights and defend St. Paul's outrageous actions? The comments express legitimate concerns. In fact, when I first heard about this case, ...