Symposium: Just give the Court a chance

[Draggingtree]

Scotus Blog: Symposium: Just give the Court a chance

By Joshua Thompson and Ralph Kasarda on Jan 6, 2015 at 2:52 pm

Joshua Thompson and Ralph Kasarda are staff attorneys with the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento. PLF filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioners in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Community Project, Inc.

 

A decision from the Supreme Court in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Community Project, Inc. will mark the end of disparate impact under the Fair Housing Act. Nobody really believes that the Supreme Court would accept an identical issue three times in four years only to affirm what is a consensus among the government and the courts of appeals. The only real question is whether the Supreme Court will get to hear the case.

 

The issue before the Court is straightforward: does the Fair Housing Act recognize disparate impact claims – a legal theory of liability in which proof of discriminatory intent is irrelevant? The Court has previously granted certiorari on that issue twice. In 2011, the Court granted the petition for certiorari in Magner v. Gallagher. Yet, after briefing and days before oral argument,

[Draggingtree]

Symposium: The disparate-impact framework remains essential and effective

By John Paul Schnapper-Casteras on Jan 7, 2015 at 10:08 am

John Paul Schnapper-Casteras is Special Counsel for Appellate and Supreme Court Advocacy at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which filed an amicus brief in support of the respondents in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Community Project, Inc.

 

A fair and proper interpretation of the Fair Housing Act requires an understanding of the compelling reasons the Act was passed in the first place – and its necessity today. The historical perspective informs not only how the statute’s disparate-impact framework should be interpreted, but also which constitutional principles bear upon the Supreme Court’s analysis of Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project. The statute’s contemporary application demonstrates how the Act continues to fulfill its animating goals. Thus, there are two essential points to bear in mind. First, the Act is a response to an expansive system of racial residential segregation. Second, housing segregation has produced a lasting legacy of intertwined social and economic ills based on race that the Act continues to work to undo. Through careful burden shifting, the disparate-impact standard addresses both the direct vestiges of intentional housing discrimination, as well as the enduring disparities that such discrimination set in motion.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/01/symposium-the-disparate-impact-framework-remains-essential-and-effective/#more-223622

[Valin]

On A Related Note

 

4 Key Upcoming Supreme Court Cases Involving Spider-Man, the Confederate Flag and Obamacare

Elizabeth Slattery, Tiffany Bates

January 12, 2015

 

Today the Supreme Court will be back in full swing, hearing oral arguments in a number of important cases. In addition to a case dealing with discrimination against Muslims and a few involving freedom of speech, here are other noteworthy cases coming up.

 

(Snip)

 

The constitutionality of traditional marriage laws may also come before the Court this spring. While the Court declined to review a number of cases last fall, it is increasingly likely that the justices will grant review in one of the more recent petitions filed with the Court challenging laws in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

 

While the Court does not typically announce the reason for not agreeing to hear a case, it is likely the Court declined to review prior cases last fall because, at that time, every appellate court had ruled that these laws violate the U.S. Constitution. But in November, the Midwest-based Sixth Circuit upheld traditional marriage laws in several states. This disagreement (known as a “circuit split”) increases the chances that the Court will decide to grant review in one of these cases this term. You can read about many of the other big cases of this term here.

[Cyber_Liberty]

So, the NAACP's position has not changed in decades. Makes sense, I suppose, when you consider the principle that solving a problem leads to dissolution of any groups that were formed to address the problem. IOW, NAACP will, by definition, never see a satisfactory conclusion no matter what happens, and to complain is baked in the cake.

 

(As an aside, I want to point out the "C" in "NAACP" is raciss. If I walked up to a black person and called him a "colored person," I would get my butt kicked if it were outside of work, and be summarily fired if it were inside.)

[Cyber_Liberty]

On A Related Note

 

4 Key Upcoming Supreme Court Cases Involving Spider-Man, the Confederate Flag and Obamacare

Elizabeth Slattery, Tiffany Bates

January 12, 2015

 

Today the Supreme Court will be back in full swing, hearing oral arguments in a number of important cases. In addition to a case dealing with discrimination against Muslims and a few involving freedom of speech, here are other noteworthy cases coming up.

 

(Snip)

 

The constitutionality of traditional marriage laws may also come before the Court this spring. While the Court declined to review a number of cases last fall, it is increasingly likely that the justices will grant review in one of the more recent petitions filed with the Court challenging laws in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

 

While the Court does not typically announce the reason for not agreeing to hear a case, it is likely the Court declined to review prior cases last fall because, at that time, every appellate court had ruled that these laws violate the U.S. Constitution. But in November, the Midwest-based Sixth Circuit upheld traditional marriage laws in several states. This disagreement (known as a “circuit split”) increases the chances that the Court will decide to grant review in one of these cases this term. You can read about many of the other big cases of this term here.

 

I had to click in to that, just to see what the Marvel case was about. I was hoping it was a discussion on the principle, "With great power comes great responsibility." Sadly, this is not the case, it's about a squirtgun.