Racism without intent
While the Supreme Court is always in the headlines in late June, this year it really made a splash. In two days, the court released a decision protecting the Affordable Care Act and another establishing access to civil marriage for same-sex couples. Both decisions are major steps toward a just and fair society.
Amid the chorus of Facebook likes and rainbow images, it was easy to overlook another critical ruling: a 5-4 majority voted to continue interpreting the Fair Housing Act of 1968 as prohibiting housing discrimination whether or not that discrimination is intentional. The landmark civil rights law made it illegal to refuse to sell or rent to someone on account of their race. The court maintained that “disparate-impact claims” can be brought under the FHA—that is, the law covers the effects of housing practices, not just their intentions.
It’s an important distinction—not just for housing discrimination, but as a lens on racism generally. Because it is not legal to put up explicit barriers between African Americans and housing, public accommodations, or the ballot box, some Americans think the nation has dealt with racism and can move on.
