Supreme Court Upholds Disparate Impact: Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc.

Civil Rights Practice Group Courthouse Steps Teleforum

On June 25, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision that the Wall Street Journal has characterized as a "Disastrous Misreading of the Fair Housing Act," ruling that disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. The consensus of court-watchers predicted an opposite holding. Is the Court’s decision a broad endorsement of the government’s use of disparate impact theory? Our experts will discuss the implications of the decision.

• William Consovoy, Partner, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC
• Ralph W. Kasarda, Staff Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

On June 25, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision that the Wall Street Journal has characterized as a "Disastrous Misreading of the Fair Housing Act," ruling that disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. The consensus of court-watchers predicted an opposite holding. Is the Court’s decision a broad endorsement of the government’s use of disparate impact theory? Our experts will discuss the implications of the decision.

• William Consovoy, Partner, Consovoy McCarthy PLLC
• Ralph W. Kasarda, Staff Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation

Call begins at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.