As of Sept. 9, 13 amicus briefs had been filed in the Supreme Court case of Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action Inc. In the case, the Supreme Court is being asked to rule on whether disparate impact claims are recognized under the Fair Housing Act.
Twelve of the 13 friends of the court briefs support the township's position that the Fair Housing Act prohibits only intentional discrimination and does not allow disparate impact claims, according to an article in the CFPB [Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] Monitor, published by the Ballard Spahr law firm.
The Mortgage Bankers Association joined in with a brief filed jointly by the American Financial Services Association, the Consumer Mortgage Coalition and the Independent Community Bankers of America.
The American Bankers Association filed a brief jointly with the...