image_pdfimage_print

Credit & Economic Opportunity

Policy Analysis

Policy Briefs, Reports & Press Releases

Comments, Letters, & Testimony

Litigation & Amicus Briefs

  • American Insurance Association v. U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Case No. 1:13-cv-00966-RJL (D.D.C.) NCLC joined an amicus brief drafted by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union, also joined by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, in support of the defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment in this case challenging HUD’s Discriminatory Effects Rule under the Fair Housing Act. (2/20/2014)
  • Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., U.S. Supreme Court, No. 11-1507
    NCLC and ACLU filed an amicus brief, joined by seven other advocacy groups, supporting the respondents’ position that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit decided correctly in ruling that the Fair Housing Act authorizes disparate impact civil rights claims as a means to combat housing discrimination.
  • Beverly Adkins et al. v Morgan Stanley: NCLC is co-counsel for African American plaintiffs in a landmark lawsuit brought against Morgan Stanley. The lawsuit claims that the Defendant violated federal civil rights laws, the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act as well as state laws by adopting mortgage securitization policies that caused predatory lending and adversely impacted African Americans in the Detroit, Michigan area.
  • Subprime Mortgage Discrimination: National class action cases brought under the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act against certain subprime mortgage lenders.
  • Auto Finance Discrimination: NCLC served as co-counsel in national class-action cases brought under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act against certain auto finance companies and banks. The lawsuits, which exposed practices that had operated secretly for over 75 years and had resulted in higher-interest-rate car loans for African Americans and Hispanics, have transformed car financing practices across the industry.
  • Magner v. Gallaher, U.S. Supreme Court No.1032
  • NCLC has joined an amicus brief prepared by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law with other national civil rights organizations arguing that the Fair Housing Act properly is interpreted to authorize disparate impact claims and that the Eight Circuit applied the correct burden-shifting approach to litigating disparate impact claims consistent with the way Title VII cases are litigated and HUD’s proposed regulation governing this subject. Brief. NCLC also consulted with the ACLU (which cites NCLC’s Credit Discrimination manual and references NCLC’s sub-prime mortgage discrimination disparate impact cases brought under the Fair Housing Act) and the Department of Justice with regards to the preparation of the amicus briefs they separately prepared and filed with the Supreme Court in the appeal. Briefs.

 

Equal Access to Higher Education

Policy Briefs, Reports & Press Releases

Letters

Litigation

Webinars

Why is America’s Racial Wealth Gap Growing?, sponsored by the Insight Center and PolicyLink, March 6, 2013. NCLC attorney Deanne Loonin addresses equal access to higher education.

 

Sustainable Homeownership

Policy Analysis
Policy Briefs, Reports and Press Releases

Comments

Letters

Litigation & Amicus Briefs

  • Action against discriminatory targeting of African-American consumers for abusive credit terms in home purchases.
    Horne et al v. Harbour Portfolio et al.     Second Amended Complaint (N.D. GA)
    Horne et al v. Harbour Portfolio et al.     Third Amended Complaint (N.D. GA)
    Opposition to Defendant Harbour’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint
    Opposition to Defendant NAA’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint
    Order on Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (N.D. GA)

    Horne v. Harbour Portfolio    , Unites States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia: Suit was brought by the Atlanta Legal Aid Society on behalf of 22 African-American residents representing 16 household. The action asserted claims of discriminatory targeting for abusive credit terms in home purchase “contract for deed” transactions extended by Harbour Portfolio. The complaint alleged that Harbour Portfolio, through both intentional targeting of African-American consumers and practices that have a foreseeable disparate impact on African-American consumers, violated the Fair Housing Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq., the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691, et seq., and the Georgia Fair Housing Act, O.C.G.A. § 8-3-200 et seq. NCLC subsequently joined the case as plaintiffs’ co-counsel.On March 20, 3018, the Court denied a motion to dismiss for all but one of the claims asserted (wrongful eviction). Thereafter, during on-going discovery, including subpoenas issued to Fannie Mae, requests for production of documents by the defendants and depositions of the defendant principal, the parties engaged in mediation before a U.S. Magistrate Judge.The case settled in December, 2018. The 12 households who were still living in their homes received a deed converting their contract for deed to a mortgage with title insurance, reduced interest rates, shorter repayment terms and, in some cases, principal reductions. They also received a lump sum cash payment. The four households who were evicted/no longer living in the home received separate lump sum cash payments. As part of the settlement, separate attorneys’ fees were paid to plaintiffs’ counsel of record. (More information on land installment contracts including NCLC’s 2016 report, Toxic Transactions: How Land Installment Contracts Once Again Threaten Communities of Color, here)
  • Connecticut Fair Housing Center, Inc. vs Liberty Bank Case No. 18-1654 || Press Releaseand Complaint
    The National Consumer Law Center and and the Connecticut Fair Housing Center filed a fair housing lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against Liberty Bank, alleging that Liberty Bank violated the Fair Housing Act by: engaging in a pattern and practice of redlining communities where most of the residents are racial and ethnic minorities; discriminating against African – American and Latinx mortgage applicants and; discouraging African – American and Latinx mortgage applicants from applying for credit. Press Release and Settlement Agreement.
  • National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) v. HUD, Amicus brief || Appendix A
    The case seeks to protect HUD’s 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule.
  • Bank of America, et al v. City of Miami (United States Supreme Court, 2016). The NCLC, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, the Impact Fund, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and the Poverty & Race Research Action Council, filed an amicus brief supporting the standing of the City of Miami to assert discrimination claims against Bank of America and Wells Fargo under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The brief argues that standing under the FHA extends to municipalities not directly targeted by discrimination. Noting that racially discriminatory lending practices are a major cause of this country’s residential segregation, the brief asserts that the FHA was designed to address the systemic problems associated with such segregation and to permit cities to seek redress for injuries caused by discriminatory practices.
  • Property Casualty Insurers Assoc. of America v. Donovan (N.D. Ill. 2014). The NCLC, along with 12 civil rights and grassroots organizations, filed an amicus brief in an action brought by the insurance industry challenging a rule formalized by HUD in 2013 that recognized disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act. The insurance industry sought to invalidate the rule’s application to the homeowner’s insurance industry. Examining the history and persistence of insurance redlining, the organizations argued that application of the rule is vital to ensuring fairness in the market for homeowner’s insurance and is consistent with sound actuarial practices, and other business related practices.
    Decision: The U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois decision dismissed the industry’s claim under McCarran-Ferguson for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as that claim was not ripe for judicial review and also rejected the industry’s challenge to HUD’s adoption, in the rule, of a three-step burden-shifting approach. However, the court did determine that HUD did not adequately consider substantive comments submitted by the industry prior to adoption of the rule and remanded the case to HUD to provide further reasoned explanations of the rule’s impact under McCarran-Ferguson, the filed-rate doctrine, and its general effects on the insurance industry.American Insurance Assoc. v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Dev. (D.C. 2014). The NCLC joined the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the National Community Reinvestment Coalition in an amicus brief in support of HUD in an action brought by homeowner’s insurance associations seeking to invalidate the agency’s issuance of a rule which codified its long-standing interpretation that the Fair Housing Act prohibits disparate impact discrimination. Noting the history and persistence of insurance redlining, NCLC argued that this pre-enforcement challenge to the rule should be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds without reaching the merits.
  • Beverly Adkins et al. v Morgan Stanley: NCLC is co-counsel for African American plaintiffs in a landmark lawsuit brought against Morgan Stanley. The lawsuit claims that the Defendant violated federal civil rights laws, the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act as well as state laws by adopting mortgage securitization policies that caused predatory lending and adversely impacted African Americans in the Detroit, Michigan area.
    • The Adkins v. Morgan Stanley lawsuit asserts that Morgan Stanley pursued mortgage securitization policies and practices that, through their funding of now-defunct mortgage lender New Century Mortgage Company, resulted in a significant discriminatory impact on African-American borrowers in the Detroit metropolitan area, flooding the already highly segregated community with toxic, combined-risk subprime loans in the lead-up to the collapse of the housing market in 2008. Read the expert reports submitted in support of the reverse red-lining allegations made in the case and NCLC’s issue brief detailing key findings by the experts.
      NCLC Issue Brief
      Ayers Expert Report
      McCoy Expert Report
      Oliver Expert Report
      Segrue Expert Report
  • Subprime Mortgage Discrimination: National class action cases brought under the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act against certain subprime mortgage lenders
  • Magner v. Gallaher, U.S. Supreme Court No.1032
    NCLC has joined an amicus brief prepared by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law with other national civil rights organizations arguing that the Fair Housing Act properly is interpreted to authorize disparate impact claims and that the Eight Circuit applied the correct burden-shifting approach to litigating disparate impact claims consistent with the way Title VII cases are litigated and HUD’s proposed regulation governing this subject. Brief. NCLC also consulted with the ACLU (which cites NCLC’s Credit Discrimination manual and references NCLC’s sub-prime mortgage discrimination disparate impact cases brought under the Fair Housing Act) and the Department of Justice with regards to the preparation of the amicus briefs they separately prepared and filed with the Supreme Court in the appeal. Briefs.

 

Equitable Access to Broadband, Media, and Telecom Services

Policy Analysis

Comments, Letters, & Testimony