There is no question that the law was meant to cover intentional discrimination. At issue before the Court is whether the law also authorizes claims where practices have a discriminatory effect, even if they were not motivated by an intent to discriminate. Such a standard is known as “disparate impact.”
The justices will hear arguments in the case on Wednesday.
–
“If there is discrimination occurring, there ought to be some evidence of it, then action should be taken without having to get into statistics about whether or not it had a slight, medium, or large effect over some group,” he said.
The Obama administration has weighed in against Texas noting that the Department of Housing and Urban Development — the agency charged with administering the FHA — interprets the act to allow disparate impact claims.
