ABA today asked the financial regulators and law enforcement agencies to include in their guidance, exam procedures and appropriate regulations the Supreme Court’s framework for using disparate impact analysis to enforce the Fair Housing Act.
Fair lending today calls for robust compliance management systems that track all products, customer interactions, and variations in pricing or policy—and that foster corrective action when needed.
ABA yesterday released a bank members-only staff analysis of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Texas v. Inclusive Communities Project, which found that “disparate impact” analysis to demonstrate discrimination claims is recognized under the Fair Housing Act.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that disparate impact claims are enforceable under the Fair Housing Act. The decision in the case — Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project — included a note of caution that statistical disparities only impose liability if plaintiffs can connect it to a defendant’s policy causing the disparity in order to “protect defendants against abusive disparate-impact claims.”
By a 231-195 vote, the House yesterday passed an amendment to a government spending bill that would prevent the use of disparate impact analysis by the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Fair Housing Act.
ABA and several housing groups today urged the House to pass an amendment that would prevent the use of disparate impact analysis by the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Fair Housing Act.
Mortgage lenders need to watch out for repurchase risk, the future of Fannie and Freddie, disparate impact litigation and the non-Qualified Mortgage space.