News

New Trump Policy To Weaken Civil Rights Discrimination Law For Housing

President Donald Trump is working on weakening the civil rights-era Fair Housing Act, which protects homeowners and renters from discrimination. 

Housing advocates claim the new policy will make it much more difficult to bring lawsuits claiming discrimination, while conservatives believe the new move would stop insubstantial lawsuits. 

A draft of the Department of Housing and Urban Development rules would target “disparate impact.” Disparate impact are practices in housing that affect a group of protected people more than others even though the rules should apply to everyone equally. This means that to prove discrimination in a lawsuit, plaintiffs don’t have to prove that a company is refusing to make loans to minorities, only that a company has a policy that has a discriminatory aftermath. 

The proposal is set to be announced in August. 

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter!

A week of political news in your in-box.
We find the news you need to know, so you don't have to.

A recent lawsuit claims Bank of America was treating foreclosed homes in minority neighborhoods drastically poorly. Lawns weren’t mowed, windows were missing, and their entrances weren’t secured. 

Lisa Rice, president of the National Fair Housing Alliance, says she looked at foreclosed properties in more than 70 communities across the country. According to her, all had comparable levels of owner-occupied homes. In response to this lawsuit, she said, “In the white communities that we looked at, the story was completely different. “The grass was mowed, the doors were secure, the windows were not broken, we didn’t see trash and debris.”

Bank of America denies the claims of the lawsuit, stating, “Our commitment to sustainable homeownership for low- to moderate-income and multicultural clients and communities has always been a hallmark of Bank of America.” 

In this case, if the new policy is adopted, plaintiffs would now have to prove that the company’s policies were intended to be discriminatory, whereas before, plaintiffs only had to prove that the policy itself was discriminatory. 

Anacaona Rodriguez Martinez

Recent Posts

After Biden Commutes Sentences Of 1,500 People, GOP Critics Call It A Ploy To Deflect From Pardon Of Son Hunter

Last week, President Joe Biden announced that he would pardon 39 people and commute the prison sentences…

1 day ago

GOP Rep. Chip Roy Rants Against His Own Party For Backing Debt-Raising Bill, Trump Calls For A Primary Opponent Against Him

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) condemned his fellow Republican lawmakers during a rant on the House floor after…

2 days ago

VIDEO: Rep Mike Waltz Does 44 Pushups After Army’s 31-13 Loss Against Navy in Annual Football Match

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_kYWlyzuiMk Rep. Mike Waltz did 44 pushups to honor a bet after the Army football…

3 days ago

‘President’ Elon Musk Slammed By Democrats After He Tanks Bipartisan Spending Bill To Avert Shutdown

In a series of X posts on Wednesday, the platform's CEO Elon Musk criticized a bipartisan spending…

3 days ago

Biden Doubts His Legacy As He Hands Over Power To The Man He Called ‘A Threat To Democracy’

"You can't love your country only when you win." President Joe Biden has repeated this phrase to…

4 days ago

Top Democrat On House Ethics Committee, Rep. Susan Wild, Misses Meeting After Report On Matt Gaetz Leaks

Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pennsylvania), the top Democrat on the House Ethics Committee, missed a committee meeting after…

5 days ago