Trump's Order Guts Cornerstone of Modern Civil Rights Law Used to Enforce Antidiscrimination Laws

 

Trump’s order directs federal agencies to “deprioritize enforcement” of statutes and regulations that include disparate-impact liability, which has long enabled courts to stop policies and practices that unfairly exclude people on the basis of protected characteristics such as race, gender, and disability. The order also instructs the U.S. attorney general to repeal key components of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that bar any program receiving federal financial support from discrimination based on “race, color, or national origin.”

Disparate impact claims allow consumers to challenge a variety of discriminatory practices aimed at people of color, people with disabilities, families with young children, and women, among others. These practices would otherwise, even when identified, go unaddressed. Lawsuits bringing disparate impact claims have exposed and remedied longstanding patterns of discrimination and brought relief to thousands of consumers. During the subprime lending boom that led to the Great Recession of 2008, communities of color were targeted for high-risk, high interest rate loans, and they were hit especially hard by the financial crisis. Many lawsuits bringing disparate impact claims were filed in an attempt to alter this toxic reality and bring relief to individual consumers. These lawsuits unmasked widespread discriminatory lending practices. 

Derek Black, who directs the Constitutional Law Center at the University of South Carolina, said the administration was misstating the law. “If it were true that disparate-impact liability creates ‘a near insurmountable presumption of unlawful discrimination,’ we might have rid the country of disparities long ago,” he wrote on X. The concept of disparate impact, she said, prevents employers from excluding qualified candidates because of their race, gender or another protected characteristic.

In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court set precedent when it unanimously ruled in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. that the company could not use arbitrary tests or requirements in hiring and promotion if it could not prove they served a genuine business need. The court found that even if the company was not purposefully trying to discriminate based on race, if the policies had a discriminatory effect, they were illegal.

“There’s been an effort to say that with discrimination, the only kind of harm we care about is the egregious, smoking-gun evidence of animus or harassment, or where somebody is bigoted,” Yang said. “But there is often very significant harm to individuals from organizational practices that are discriminatory, yet very difficult to prove.”

While Trump’s executive order does not stop private individuals from suing over workplace and other kinds of discrimination. States and localities are also strengthening their nondiscrimination laws.

Read the April 24, 2025 Washington Post article.

<a href="https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/still-life-business-roles-with-various-pawns_24749557.htm#fromView=search&page=1&position=4&uuid=1b91fbd8-73b8-430c-92bd-eb1be0796a39&query=one+is+excluded+from+group">Image by freepik</a>.

Obituary: Herbert J. Gans, Poverty & Urban Researcher, 97

Gans, a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany who became an innovative sociologist in the U.S., explored the myths and misconceptions surrounding poverty, class, urban renewal, and suburban malaise. A longtime professor at Columbia University and former president of the American Sociological Association, Gans was an Ivy League academic, an advocate for liberal causes and a social critic, contributing essays to many publications. He aimed, he said, to connect his research with the lives of ordinary people, and to work toward answering a fundamental question: “What is a good society, and how can sociology help bring it about?” His writing covered Americana from the postwar years into the 2000s, exploring race relations, economic problems, highbrow and popular cultures, nostalgia for the rural past, and an assortment of provocative questions: Why do the poor get poorer and the rich richer? Can Jews and Italians get along in Canarsie? Is landmarks preservation elitist? 

Gans served on the Kerner Commission, which President Lyndon B. Johnson established in 1967 to investigate the cause of riots and unrest that had broken out in cities around the country. He helped draft the commission’s report, an indictment of White racism that warned that “our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal.”

His first book, The Urban Villagers: Group and Class in the Life of Italian-Americans (New York: Free Press, 1962), was a vivid chronicle of an Italian American enclave that was displaced and leveled by urban renewal. Gans showed how the area was far from the slum that government officials had made it out to be, and argued that a middle-class bias had caused the low-rent neighborhood to be wrongly perceived as derelict and run-down. Gans wrote frequently about the poor and working classes, arguing for new anti-poverty measures in his 1995 book The War Against The Poor: The Underclass And Antipoverty Policy. As he saw it, the country’s least privileged had been stigmatized through terms like “underclass,” which contributed to a sense in which the poor were to be blamed for their condition, and ignored or punished rather than helped. An important article in this vein was his "The Uses of Poverty: The Poor Pay All," (Social Policy, July/August 1971: pp. 20-24).

Read the April 24, 2025 Washington Post obituary.

On Behalf of Equal Rights Center, Relman Colfax PLLC Alleges Washington, DC-Based UDR Tenant Screening Policies are Discriminatory

On April 25, 2025, Relman Colfax filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C. Superior Court on behalf of the Equal Rights Center against UDR, Inc. and the owners of The MO apartment building (in northeast D.C.) alleging that The MO’s tenant screening policies discriminate against housing voucher holders and housing applicants with criminal legal histories in violation of the Washington, D.C. Human Rights Act and the D.C. Fair Criminal Record Screening for Housing Act of 2016.

The complaint alleges that the defendants openly discriminate based on applicants’ source of income and criminal legal history, even posting some of their illegal policies on The MO’s website. ERC claims that these policies erect yet another barrier to housing for populations for which stable housing is particularly important.

The ERC conducted an investigation using fair housing testers to ascertain whether Defendants were engaging in unlawful discrimination against individuals attempting to rent units at The MO. Through its investigation, the ERC found that Defendants and their agents have a policy or practice of making statements and/or imposing conditions that exclude voucher holders based on illegal criteria, as well as renters with criminal histories from access to rental units at The MO. 

“ERC’s lawsuit employs consumer protection law in a pioneering effort to secure safe and affordable housing for D.C. residents,” stated Mirela Missova, Supervising Counsel at the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. “Discriminatory policies significantly hinder the ability to safeguard low-income tenants.”

Through its complaint, ERC seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to ensure that The MO comes into compliance with District requirements for equitable tenant screening policies. This lawsuit represents a critical step toward making equitable housing opportunities a reality in the District. The Relman Colfax litigation team consisted of Zoila Hinson, with paralegal assistance from Miriam Farah. The co-counsel is Mirela Missova of the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.

Unfortunately, discrimination against tenants by rental housing providers for such illegal screening as housing discrimination are too frequent of late. For instance, a complaint was filed in November, 2024 regarding alleged discrimination against two private equity landlords in Indianapolis, Indiana.

A copy of the complaint can be found here.

Read the April 23, 2025 RC article.

Read the November 21, 2024 NBC TV10 Philadelphia article.

Federal Judge Issues Temporary Restraining Order to Temporarily Stop HUD/DOGE’s Termination of FHIP Grants to Fight Housing Discrimination

 

After Relman Colfax PLLC and four members of the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), On March 26th, Judge Richard G. Stearns of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) halting the termination of 78 FHIP grants. 

The original legal action followed HUD’s sudden and alleged unlawful termination of grants disbursed under the Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP). The termination of those grants jeopardizes over $30 million in critical, congressionally authorized funding for fair housing groups to fight housing discrimination and enforce fair housing laws throughout the U.S. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in the District of Massachusetts, was brought on behalf of a proposed class of over 60 fair housing groups whose grants were abruptly terminated by HUD and DOGE on February 27, 2025. 

Fair housing groups, funded by FHIP, have long served as the backbone of efforts to combat housing discrimination, enforcing the Fair Housing Act (FHA). These groups investigate housing discrimination complaints, enforce fair housing laws, assist individuals facing discrimination, educate communities about their rights, and collaborate with local governments to expand fair and affordable housing opportunities. FHIP grants–which originated from Congress’s recognition of the central role of fair housing organizations in combatting housing discrimination–are a primary source of funding for fair housing groups.

On February 27th, a letter informed grantees that the terminations were effective that same day. 78 FHIP grants were terminated altogether, representing a primary source of funding for fair housing organizations in 33 states. The FHIP grants were halted at the direction of the DOGE, claiming the grants “no longer effectuate the program goals or agency priorities,” despite grantees performing activities aligned with Congressionally authorized aims. The filing argued that DOGE lacked the authority to direct HUD to cancel grants, and HUD cannot follow such directives.

Fair housing organizations, particularly the four named plaintiffs in the TRO filing, are already feeling the harm and devastating effects of this funding termination. The Massachusetts Fair Housing Center, Intermountain Fair Housing Council, Fair Housing Council of South Texas – San Antonio Fair Housing Council, and Housing Research and Advocacy Center – Fair Housing Center for Rights and Research are among the plaintiffs who have long fought to dismantle discriminatory housing practices in their respective regions and beyond.

Fair housing is a legal right, and FHIP grants were a promise to the American people that cannot be revoked at DOGE’s direction without any explanation. Relman Colfax and these organizations are resolute in fighting for the organizations, families, individuals, and communities that FHIP grants safeguard.

A copy of the filing can be found here.

Read the March 13, 2025 NFHA article.

Last Chance to Register for MCCR's Fair Housing Forum on Monday, April 28

 

Tuesday, April 22, 2025

Monday, April 28 10:00am to 3:00pm Fair Housing Forum​​ Howard County Community College Smith Theater 10901 Little Patuxent Parkway Columbia, Maryland 21044 Register Online Join us for an insightful and interactive forum focused on Maryland's Fair Housing Laws. This event offers a unique opportunity to discuss, share, and address key issues and solutions in our state

Victim of Discrimination? Training & Partnerships

UPCOMING EVENTS Thursday, April 17 at 1pm Civil Rights Coalition of Maryland - Virtual Open House #2 Registration Required: https://bit.ly/3E2lDwy

HOME      ABOUT MCCR      SERVICES      PUBLICATIONS      EVENTS      PRESS      CONTACT US

Economic Action MD Fund Fair Housing discussion on April 30th at the Northpoint Library

Everyone deserves a safe and affordable home. Yet, despite more than 40 years of civil rights work and laws, many Maryland residents still face discrimination when they seek an apartment or a mortgage. 

What kinds of fair housing issues happen most in Maryland? Where can individuals get help if they believe they’ve experienced housing discrimination? How does housing discrimination affect our community? Answers to these questions and many more will be topics at the April 30th Fair Housing discussion:

    April 30th, 6 - 7:30 p.m.

    Northpoint Library, 1716 Merritt Boulevard, Dundalk MD 21222

    Click Here to Register!

Our knowledgeable fair housing panelists include:

• Ahmna Khan, Director of Housing, Maryland Inclusive Housing.
• Susan McClanahan, Fair Housing Director, Equal Rights Center.
• Albert Turner, Attorney, Right to Housing Project, Public Justice Center.
• Moderated by: LaToya McKay, Fair Housing Specialist, Economic Action MD Fund.

We will also have resources on fair housing and other critical basic needs from nonprofits and state agencies including: the Family Crisis Center, Community Relations Commission, Community Assistance Network, Office of Attorney General Civil Rights, Fulton Bank, Economic Action Maryland Fund, Equal Rights Center, and Maryland Inclusive Housing.

Join us for this important discussion. Enjoy light food and refreshments and connect with groups that serve our community.  

We look forward to seeing you there!

Interesting Recent Research on Redlining & Housing Segregation: Part 2: Health Effects.

The following are six recently-published academic studies of the redlining aspects of housing segregation and the authors' summaries. If available, their section snippets, full-text, other summaries, and publishers are available online via the links.

"Association of Residential Segregation with Mortality in the U.S., 2018–2022," by Lu Zhang PhD, Nuo Nova Yang MSPH, Tianjiao Shen MPH, Xiaoqian Sun PhD, K. Robin Yabroff PhD, & Xuesong Han PhD. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2025. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749379725000091.

This study aimed to examine the association of county-level racial and economic residential segregation with mortality rates in the U.S. between 2018 and 2022. Residential segregation was measured by the Index of Concentration at the Extremes and categorized into quintiles. Outcomes included 2018–2022 county-level age-adjusted mortality rates from all causes and the top 10 causes. Multilevel linear mixed modeling was clustered at the state level and adjusted for county's poverty, metropolitan status, and racial composition.

A total of 3,129 counties were included. County-level age-adjusted mortality rates decreased as the segregation level decreased for all causes (from 1,078.8 deaths in the most segregated counties to 734.92 deaths in the least segregated counties per 100,000 persons per year) and for 10 leading causes. Adjusted rate ratios showed dose-response associations between segregation and mortality from all causes and 9 out of 10 leading causes. Using the least segregated counties as the reference group, the adjusted rate ratios (aRR) for all-cause mortality was 1.25 (95% CI=1.22, 1.28), 1.20 (1.17, 1.22), 1.13 (1.11, 1.15), and 1.09 (1.08, 1.10) for the first (most segregated) through the fourth quintile of segregation, respectively.

Racial and economic residential segregation was positively associated with mortality rates at the county level in the contemporary U.S. Future studies should elucidate the mechanisms underlying associations to inform evidence-based interventions and improve the health of the entire population.

"Living in Historically Redlined Neighborhoods and the Cognitive Function of Black and White Adults," by Calley E. Fisk, PhD, Jennifer A. Ailshire, PhD, & Katrina M. Walsemann. OnlineFirst. First published online January 18, 2025. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10552-024-01950-9.

We determined if living in historically redlined neighborhoods was associated with level and change in cognitive functioning and if this association differed for Black and White older adults. We linked the Health and Retirement Study 1998–2018 data to redlining scores from the Historic Redlining Indicator data. Our sample included adults aged 50 years and older (24,230 respondents, 129,618 person-period observations). Using three-level linear mixed models, we estimated the relationship between living in historically redlined neighborhoods on level and change in cognitive functioning for pooled and race-stratified samples.

Residents of historically redlined “Declining” and “Hazardous” neighborhoods had lower cognitive functioning scores compared to residents of “Best/Desirable” neighborhoods. Among Black adults, living in “Hazardous” neighborhoods was associated with slower declines in cognitive functioning compared to living in “Best/Desirable” neighborhoods.
Historical redlining is associated with older adults’ cognitive functioning, underscoring the importance of sociohistorical context for the neighborhood–cognition relationship.

"Historical redlining and all-cause survival after breast cancer diagnosis," by Sarah M. Lima, Tia M. Palermo, Furrina F. Lee, et. al. Cancer Epidemiolgy, Biomarkers & Prevention (April 3, 2025). https://aacrjournals.org/cebp/article-abstract/doi/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-1862/754632/Historical-redlining-and-all-cause-survival-after?redirectedFrom=fulltext.

Historical redlining, a 1930s-era form of residential segregation and proxy of structural racism, has been associated with breast cancer risk, stage, and survival, but research is lacking on how known present-day breast cancer risk factors are related to historical redlining. We aimed to describe the clustering of present-day neighborhood-level breast cancer risk factors with historical redlining and evaluate geographic patterning across the U.S.

As contemporary neighborhood profiles differ according to historical redlining grade, historical redlining may contribute to current breast cancer disparities. We evaluated whether historical redlining grade is associated with overall 5-year survival in a cohort of breast cancer cases in New York State (NYS). We hypothesize worse redlining grade is associated with lower survival. Methods: This NYS Cancer Registry-based cohort included 60,773 breast cancer cases diagnosed 2008-2018 and in a census tract at diagnosis with a historical redlining grade. Cases were assigned a grade: A (“best”) to D (“hazardous”). Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HR) for 5-year mortality associated with historical redlining grade. We stratified models by case factors and neighborhood characteristics. Results: Five-year survival displayed a significant gradient with historical redlining (P<0.001). Compared to A-grade, residence in B-grade, C-grade, and D-grade neighborhood was associated with a 29%, 37%, and 64% increase in mortality, respectively (P<0.001). Associations persisted after adjustment for health insurance and treatments. Elevated risk associated with D-grade was specifically observed among non-Hispanic White cases, local and regional stage, hormone receptor-positive tumors, non-triple negative cases, and across neighborhood characteristics. 

We found significant interaction with redlining grade for race/ethnicity and neighborhood characteristics. Conclusions: Historical redlining was associated with progressively lower survival for each grade among breast cancer cases. Associations are not fully explained by healthcare factors or contemporary neighborhood characteristics. Impact: Historical redlining has lasting effects on contemporary breast cancer survival.

"Association of Historical Redlining With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: The Mediating Role of BMI and Area Deprivation Index," by Wajeeha Umer, Yi Sun; Anqi, Jiao, et.al. Diabetes Care 2025: Feb 12:dc242147.dc242147. https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article-abstract/doi/10.2337/dc24-2147/157868/Association-of-Historical-Redlining-With?redirectedFrom=fulltext.

We investigated the association between historic redlining and risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and whether this relationship is mediated by maternal obesity and area-level deprivation. This retrospective study included 86,834 singleton pregnancies from Kaiser Permanente Southern California’s health records (2008–2018). Redlining was assessed using digitized Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) maps, with patients’ residential addresses geocoded and assigned HOLC grades (A, B, C, or D) based on their geographic location within HOLC-graded zones. For GDM case patients, exposure was assigned based on address at diagnosis date; for non-case patients, it was assigned based on address during the 24th to 28th gestational week. Health records were combined with area deprivation index (ADI) from 2011 to 2015 census data. Mixed-effect logistic regression models assessed associations between redlining and GDM, with mediation by BMI and ADI evaluated using inverse odds ratio weighting. Models were adjusted for maternal age, education, race and ethnicity, neighborhood-level income, and smoking status.
Among the 10,134 (11.67%) GDM case patients, we found increased risk of GDM in B (“still desirable,” adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.20, 95% CI 0.99–1.44), C-graded (“definitely declining,” aOR 1.22, 95% CI 1.02–1.47), and D-graded (“hazardous,” i.e., redlined, aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.08–1.57) neighborhoods compared with the “best”-graded zone. Pre-pregnancy BMI and ADI mediated 44.2% and 64.5% of the increased GDM risk among mothers in redlined areas.

Historic redlining is associated with an increased risk of GDM, mediated by maternal obesity and neighborhood deprivation. Future research is needed to explore the complex pathways linking redlining to pregnancy outcomes.

"Assessing the legacy of redlining on spatial inequities in social and environmental determinants of health," by Haley Mullen & Kathleen Stewart. Applied Geography 2025: Volume 179, June 2025, 103637. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143622825001328.

Although housing discrimination was outlawed in the United States in 1968, historic redlining remains a driver of racialized inequities in environmental health. However, there are many aspects of environmental health that are not yet well-understood in relation to redlining. We investigated the legacy of redlining on social and environmental determinants of health and the spatial distribution of these relationships across Baltimore and Philadelphia. We use publicly available spatial data sources on socio-demographics, built environment, housing, mobility, and arrests to understand the distribution of determinants of health given historic redlining. Multiscale geographically weighted regression was implemented to measure the relationship between these dimensions and redlining grades. 

While we identified strong, spatially heterogenous relationships between redlining and social and environmental determinants of health, for nearly all determinants of health, we observed the most adverse characteristics in “C” tracts, indicating a yellow-lining effect. Meanwhile, redlined tracts in both cities exhibited a mix of built environment characteristics, including higher levels of walkability, housing density, renter-occupied housing, and vacancies. 

Our findings suggest that while redlining has played a role in shaping neighborhood conditions, other factors, such as ongoing disinvestment and neighborhood transformation processes are likely influential in determining current social and environmental determinants of health.

"Impact of Contemporary Redlining on Healthcare Disparities Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Mediation Analysis." Chatzipanagiotou, O.P., Woldesenbet, S., Munir, M.M. et. al. Annals of Surgical Oncology 32, 1199–1209 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-16373-8.

Historically, housing policies have perpetuated the marginalization and economic disinvestment of redlined neighborhoods. Residential segregation persists nowadays in the form of contemporary redlining, promoting healthcare disparities. The current study sought to assess the effect of redlining on oncological outcomes of patients with gastrointestinal cancer and identify mediators of the association.

Patients with colorectal or hepatobiliary cancer were identified from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database (2007-2019). The contemporary redlining index, a measure of mortgage lending bias, was assessed relative to disease stage at diagnosis, receipt of appropriate treatment, textbook outcome, and mortality. Mediation analysis was used to identify socioeconomic, structural, and clinical mediating factors.
Among 94,988 patients, 32.2% resided in high (n = 23,872) and highest (n = 6,791) redlining census tracts compared with 46.2% in neutral and 21.6% in low redlining tracts. The proportion of Black, Hispanic, and White patients experiencing high and highest redlining was 65.9%, 41.6%, and 27.9%, respectively. Highest redlining was associated with 18.2% higher odds of advanced disease at diagnosis, greater odds of not undergoing surgery for localized disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.363, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.219-1.524) or not receiving chemotherapy for advanced disease (aOR 1.385, 95% CI 1.216-1.577), and 26.7% lower odds of textbook outcome achievement. Mediation analysis for appropriate treatment quantified the proportion of the association driven by socioeconomic status, racial/ethnic minority status, racial/economic segregation, primary care shortage, and housing/transportation.

"Persistent Effect of Redlining on Survival from Screenable Cancers in Washington State, 2000–2018," by Amiri, S., Petras, A. & Buchwald, D.  Journal of Urban Health (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-025-00973-0.

This study examined the extent to which the 1930s Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) redlining grades are associated with contemporary survival from screenable cancers among residents of three largest cities in Washington State. Redling assigned a mortgage security metric to neighborhoods. We used 2000–2018 data from the Washington State Cancer Registry to examine differences in survival from all-cause and cancer-specific mortality for breast (n = 14,725), cervical (n = 656), colorectal (n = 7,089), and lung (n = 8,365). Survival was examined in HOLC areas graded as A (best); B (still desirable); C (declining); and D (redlined) using Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression techniques. 

Among patients with breast cancer, the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was highest for areas graded D followed by C and B. For colorectal and lung cancer, the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was highest for areas graded C followed by D and B. The estimated marginal slopes for the log hazard of mortality decreased over time in HOLC areas graded A, B, and C for breast and lung cancers, and in areas graded D for colorectal and lung cancers. HOLC grade was not associated with survival among cervical cancer patients. These findings call for efforts to reduce screenable – but often unrecognized – health inequalities associated with residential location.