Disparate Impact Finally hits the Supreme Court

Publius1787

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
6,211
Reaction score
668
Points
190
Disparate Impact Finally hits the Supreme Court

For those of you unaware, "disparate impact" is a term used to describe race neutral policies in a form that makes them racist. For example, if you put a low income housing project in a run down black neighborhood so that blacks can easily move into the housing project without being uprooted you can be accused of harming blacks despite the fact that race had nothing to do with your determination to put the projects where they will be most useful. In other words, your choice to put the projects in the run down black neighborhood had a "disparate impact" on blacks. You see, you were supposed to move them into white neighborhoods free of charge so that the home value of whites will plummet and the violent crime rate will skyrocket in the white neighborhoods. By not giving blacks housing in white built prosperous areas you are in fact harming them by making them stay where they have always been: in black run depredated areas. Of course, this could go both ways. If a city council votes to invest in a run down black neighborhood blacks can still claim disparate impact because of "gentrification." Quite often there are always two sides to the disparate impact coin.

Nevertheless, Eric Holder has been trying to prevent desperate impact from reaching the supreme court. You see, disparate impact is not a law. It was made out of whole cloth by a group of leftist judges. Thus, it is a law written by judges. It has never gone before the Supreme Court and Eric Holder has desperately tried to keep it that way. See below.

Late last year, the Justice Department settled a case in Minnesota that threatened disparate impact rather than let the high court decide the issue. Attorney General Eric Holder sent aides to St. Paul to pressure the petitioner there to drop the case. When another Supreme Court housing case earlier this year challenged disparate impact, the administration went into overdrive to derail it as well. It issued a regulation through HUD formalizing the use of disparate impact to enforce fair housing and lending, though there's no such provision in either the Fair Housing Act or Equal Credit Opportunity Act. HUD Deputy Assistant Sara Pratt admitted: "We were afraid we might lose disparate impact in the Supreme Court because there was no regulation."

Now Disparate Impact has finally made it to the Supreme Court by way of TEXAS DEPT. OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS v. INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INC. If you want to hear a recording of the arguments you may click here >>. Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project Inc. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

Either way, I hope Disparate Impact goes down in a ball of flames.
 

MarathonMike

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
23,995
Reaction score
20,486
Points
2,445
Location
The Southwestern Desert
Disparate Impact Finally hits the Supreme Court

For those of you unaware, "disparate impact" is a term used to describe race neutral policies in a form that makes them racist. For example, if you put a low income housing project in a run down black neighborhood so that blacks can easily move into the housing project without being uprooted you can be accused of harming blacks despite the fact that race had nothing to do with your determination to put the projects where they will be most useful. In other words, your choice to put the projects in the run down black neighborhood had a "disparate impact" on blacks. You see, you were supposed to move them into white neighborhoods free of charge so that the home value of whites will plummet and the violent crime rate will skyrocket in the white neighborhoods. By not giving blacks housing in white built prosperous areas you are in fact harming them by making them stay where they have always been: in black run depredated areas. Of course, this could go both ways. If a city council votes to invest in a run down black neighborhood blacks can still claim disparate impact because of "gentrification." Quite often there are always two sides to the disparate impact coin.

Nevertheless, Eric Holder has been trying to prevent desperate impact from reaching the supreme court. You see, disparate impact is not a law. It was made out of whole cloth by a group of leftist judges. Thus, it is a law written by judges. It has never gone before the Supreme Court and Eric Holder has desperately tried to keep it that way. See below.

Late last year, the Justice Department settled a case in Minnesota that threatened disparate impact rather than let the high court decide the issue. Attorney General Eric Holder sent aides to St. Paul to pressure the petitioner there to drop the case. When another Supreme Court housing case earlier this year challenged disparate impact, the administration went into overdrive to derail it as well. It issued a regulation through HUD formalizing the use of disparate impact to enforce fair housing and lending, though there's no such provision in either the Fair Housing Act or Equal Credit Opportunity Act. HUD Deputy Assistant Sara Pratt admitted: "We were afraid we might lose disparate impact in the Supreme Court because there was no regulation."

Now Disparate Impact has finally made it to the Supreme Court by way of TEXAS DEPT. OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS v. INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INC. If you want to hear a recording of the arguments you may click here >>. Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project Inc. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

Either way, I hope Disparate Impact goes down in a ball of flames.
This law should be replaced by the George Jefferson law. Work your ass off, build your own business and move yourself on up to a deluxe apartment in the sky.
 
OP
Publius1787

Publius1787

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
6,211
Reaction score
668
Points
190
Disparate Impact Finally hits the Supreme Court

For those of you unaware, "disparate impact" is a term used to describe race neutral policies in a form that makes them racist. For example, if you put a low income housing project in a run down black neighborhood so that blacks can easily move into the housing project without being uprooted you can be accused of harming blacks despite the fact that race had nothing to do with your determination to put the projects where they will be most useful. In other words, your choice to put the projects in the run down black neighborhood had a "disparate impact" on blacks. You see, you were supposed to move them into white neighborhoods free of charge so that the home value of whites will plummet and the violent crime rate will skyrocket in the white neighborhoods. By not giving blacks housing in white built prosperous areas you are in fact harming them by making them stay where they have always been: in black run depredated areas. Of course, this could go both ways. If a city council votes to invest in a run down black neighborhood blacks can still claim disparate impact because of "gentrification." Quite often there are always two sides to the disparate impact coin.

Nevertheless, Eric Holder has been trying to prevent desperate impact from reaching the supreme court. You see, disparate impact is not a law. It was made out of whole cloth by a group of leftist judges. Thus, it is a law written by judges. It has never gone before the Supreme Court and Eric Holder has desperately tried to keep it that way. See below.

Late last year, the Justice Department settled a case in Minnesota that threatened disparate impact rather than let the high court decide the issue. Attorney General Eric Holder sent aides to St. Paul to pressure the petitioner there to drop the case. When another Supreme Court housing case earlier this year challenged disparate impact, the administration went into overdrive to derail it as well. It issued a regulation through HUD formalizing the use of disparate impact to enforce fair housing and lending, though there's no such provision in either the Fair Housing Act or Equal Credit Opportunity Act. HUD Deputy Assistant Sara Pratt admitted: "We were afraid we might lose disparate impact in the Supreme Court because there was no regulation."

Now Disparate Impact has finally made it to the Supreme Court by way of TEXAS DEPT. OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS v. INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INC. If you want to hear a recording of the arguments you may click here >>. Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project Inc. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

Either way, I hope Disparate Impact goes down in a ball of flames.
This law should be replaced by the George Jefferson law. Work your ass off, build your own business and move yourself on up to a deluxe apartment in the sky.
Disparate impact isn't a law. Its a fictional piece of garbage made up by leftist judges. This is the first time it has ever hit the Supreme Court.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top