ABA, the Consumer Bankers Association and the Housing Policy Council today welcomed the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s proposed standard for bringing “disparate impact” claims under the Fair Housing Act.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development will propose a new standard for bringing “disparate impact” claims under the Fair Housing Act.
The rapid pace of change will continue in 2019, ABA policy staff project.
In promulgating its rule implementing the Fair Housing Act’s discriminatory effects standard, the Department of Housing and Urban Development erred in ignoring Supreme Court precedent on determining disparate impact, ABA and 52 state bankers associations wrote in a comment letter to HUD today.
In a move long sought by ABA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development is formally seeking public comment on whether its rule implementing the Fair Housing Act’s discriminatory effects standard is consistent with the Supreme Court decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project.
In a move long sought by ABA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development signaled today that it will seek public comment on whether its rule implementing the Fair Housing Act discriminatory effects standard is consistent with the Supreme Court decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s rule implementing the Fair Housing Act discriminatory effects standard is inconsistent with current Supreme Court precedents on disparate impact theory and could be negatively affecting HUD’s housing goals, a group of House Republicans said in a letter to HUD Secretary Ben Carson today.
Responding to a request by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for suggestions of outdated or ineffective regulations, ABA and state bankers associations in all 50 states today called for changes to HUD’s rule implementing the Fair Housing Act discriminatory effects standard, calling the rule “outdated and legally wrong.”
As part of the banking industry’s continuing response to President Trump’s executive order outlining “core principles” for financial regulation, ABA today urged federal regulators and law enforcement to reign in disparate impact and redlining investigations that go beyond the law and Supreme Court precedent.
The creditor will need to defend its underwriting practices to “prove” that education level provides some amount of repayment predictability.