Ohio Fair Housing Advocates Oppose the Administration’s
Attempt to Gut Core Civil Rights Protection
HUD proposes rule that would expose people of color, women,
families with children, people of faith, people with
disabilities, and other communities to discrimination
Ohio fair housing advocates are condemning a proposed rule
recently published by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) that would destroy a key civil rights tool
under the Fair Housing Act called “disparate impact.” If the
rule is finalized, it would be virtually impossible to
challenge covert discriminatory practices by financial
institutions, insurance companies, and housing providers,
and open the floodgates for widespread discrimination
against millions of people, particularly communities of
color, women, families with children, people of faith, and
people with disabilities.
“It is imperative that we make our voices heard,” said Marie
Flannery, President and CEO of The Fair Housing Center, in
Toledo, Ohio. “The administration has been chipping away at
our civil rights since January 2017. This latest attack, if
successful, will gut an enforcement tool that has
historically had a broad and profound impact on protecting
the housing rights of all people, particularly vulnerable
populations and communities of color. The Fair Housing
Center has utilized this tool to combat systemic
discriminatory practices in the areas of homeowners
insurance, mortgage lending, and post-foreclosure property
maintenance practices that had a disparate impact on
communities of color, women, and other protected groups.”
The Fair Housing Act bars not only intentional
discrimination, but also the use of policies that appear
neutral on their face but have the effect of creating
unnecessary “disparate impact” on underserved groups such as
people of color, women, and people with disabilities.
Disparate impact is a foundational fair housing principle
and an essential part of the fabric of fair housing
enforcement.
HUD’s proposed changes would gut effective disparate impact
enforcement and dismantle essential civil rights
protections.
The move has already drawn widespread opposition from a
diverse array of civil rights, consumer protection, and
community development groups. Now, a diverse coalition of
civil rights groups has created the campaign to “Defend
Civil Rights” aimed at mobilizing thousands of people across
the country to oppose the proposed rule and sound the alarm
on its widespread, harmful consequences.
Ohio’s fair housing advocates urge Ohioans to go to DefendCivilRights.org and
submit their comments by HUD’s October 18 deadline. Your
voice matters. Make sure it is heard.
Ohio fair housing advocates supporting this effort include:
Carrie Bender-Pleasants, Executive Director - CPleasants@thehousingcenter.org
Fair Housing Center for Rights & Research, Cleveland, OH
Vincent Curry, Executive Director - Blacurr@aol.com
Fair Housing Advocates Association, Akron, OH
Lauren Green-Hull, Associate Director - LGreen@fairhousingakron.org
Fair Housing Contact Service, Inc., Akron, OH
Jeniece Jones, Executive Director – Jeniece.Jones@homecincy.org
Housing Opportunities Made Equal (HOME) of Greater
Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
Patricia Kidd, Executive Director - PatriciaKidd@msn.com
Fair Housing Resource Center Inc., Painesville, OH
Marie Flannery, President/CEO - mariemflannery@toledofhc.org
Toledo Fair Housing Center, Inc., Toledo, OH
Jim McCarthy, President/CEO – jim.mccarthy@mvfairhousing.com
Miami Valley Fair Housing Center, Inc., Dayton, OH
HUD’s proposed rule adds new standards and makes drastic
changes that institute dangerous exceptions to the disparate
impact tool, which has been used for almost 50 years to
combat discrimination. Key proposed changes include:
● Overwhelming obstacles to prove discrimination: Victims
of discrimination will face a drastically higher burden to
prove a disparate impact claim under the FHA, making it
virtually impossible to succeed.
● Profits above all else: Language in the
proposed rule suggests that a practice or policy that is
profitable could be immune from challenge for its
discriminatory impact.
● Discrimination by algorithm: The proposed rule
would provide special defenses for business practices that
rely on statistics or algorithms, such as credit scoring,
pricing, marketing, and automated underwriting systems. They
can have starkly discriminatory effects but can operate as a
hidden box, making those discriminatory effects difficult to
attribute to any person’s intentional discrimination.
● No data, no records, no accountability: Businesses
are disincentivized to collect important data that can
reveal discrimination. This means that victims of
discrimination will be unable to identify whether
discrimination is happening and lack the ability to
challenge it if they do detect discrimination.
|