May, 08 2018, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Sue Dorfman, Lawyers Committee, (202) 662-8317, press@lawyerscommittee.org, Jessica Aiwuyor, NFHA, (202)898-1661, jaiwuyor@nationalfairhousing.org, Kelli Johnson, Texas Appleseed, (512)473-2800 x103, kjohnson@texasappleseed.net, Christina Rosales, Texas Housers, (512)477-8910, christina@texashousing.org
National Civil Rights Groups File New Major Lawsuit Against Secretary Ben Carson and HUD Over Suspension of Critical Fair Housing Rule
Read the full complaint here. Register for our press call with co-counsel and co-plaintiffs, scheduled for May 8 at 11am EST here.
WASHINGTON
A coalition of national fair housing groups today asked a federal court in Washington, D.C., to order the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to reinstate a federal requirement that local and state governments address segregated housing patterns as a condition of receiving HUD funding. The complaint, filed on behalf of The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), Texas Appleseed, and Texas Low Income Housing Information Service (Texas Housers), alleges that HUD unlawfully suspended the requirement in January 2018, effectively removing civil rights oversight of as much as $5.5 billion per year until 2024 or later for almost 1,000 jurisdictions. In its place, HUD proposes that funding recipients revert to a fair housing planning process that HUD itself and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have found is ineffective.
"With this lawsuit, the civil rights community is standing up to Secretary Ben Carson and fighting back against an egregious attempt to roll back a hard fought victory," said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "The 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule is a critical part of ongoing work to address structural racism and inequality today. Through this lawsuit, we are taking action to hold HUD accountable and ensure that HUD fulfills its mission of addressing ongoing racial segregation and housing discrimination which persist across the country today."
The obligation to "affirmatively further fair housing" (AFFH) has applied to all HUD funding since the Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968. But it was not until July 2015 (47 years later) that HUD adopted the first effective set of federal regulations--known as the AFFH Rule--to guide the compliance efforts of local and state recipients of HUD's block grant funds. The AFFH Rule was adopted after years of study and consultation with stakeholders; HUD considered more than 1,000 formal comments before finalizing the Rule. Before HUD's unlawful suspension of the AFFH Rule, advocates around the country had convinced many local governments to adopt strategies to eliminate housing discrimination and promote residential integration.
For some municipalities, the AFFH Rule would be delayed until at least 2024, affecting the lives and opportunities of millions of people. By suspending implementation of the Rule, local municipalities will receive government funds with no accountability.
In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs allege that HUD's attempt to delay and dilute the AFFH Rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which sets out procedural and substantive requirements for the adoption and modification of federal regulations. HUD failed to provide advance notice or opportunity to comment on the suspension and failed to articulate any plausible reason for the suspension. Plaintiffs also allege that HUD's action violates HUD's own AFFH duty. The plaintiffs seek a court order requiring HUD to restart the implementation of the AFFH Rule immediately.
The plaintiffs are represented by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the law firm of Relman, Dane & Colfax PLLC, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), the Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC), and Public Citizen Litigation Group.
Under HUD's pre-2015 process, jurisdictions throughout the country routinely ignored problems of segregation and discrimination while continuing to collect HUD funds. For instance, Muskegon County, Ohio, overlooked complaints over several decades from a predominately African-American neighborhood that was denied access to public water service, even as surrounding white neighborhoods were served. Westchester County, New York, repeatedly certified its compliance with AFFH requirements even as it steered affordable housing developments into the most segregated neighborhoods in the county and permitted many white jurisdictions to resist affordable housing altogether. And Houston, Texas, has repeatedly closed its eyes to unequal municipal drainage systems in which predominantly white communities are protected from storm surges with engineered drainage while communities of color are relegated to open ditches that predictably overflow into adjoining homes.
The AFFH Rule created a greatly improved system for HUD grantees, including local governments, states, territories, and public housing authorities, to fulfill their obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. The Rule's required Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) is an in-depth, holistic planning process that leverages data and robust community participation to inform the selection and prioritization of measures to overcome entrenched barriers to housing discrimination, residential integration, and access to opportunity.
Under the Rule, HUD grantees must conduct AFHs on a regular schedule by using a HUD-approved tool. HUD reviews the AFHs and either approves or rejects them. In stark contrast, the pre-2015 process did not require jurisdictions to submit their fair housing plans to HUD. In fact, the GAO's analysis found that many jurisdictions did not even complete them. These jurisdictions were falsely certifying to HUD that they were fulfilling their obligation to affirmatively further fair housing when they were not doing so.
"For thirty years, NFHA has promoted the affirmatively furthering fair housing requirement of the Fair Housing Act. We have advocated to HUD to release an effective AFFH Rule, educated jurisdictions, fair housing groups and community-based organizations about the AFFH requirements, and implemented programs designed to further fair housing," said Lisa Rice, President and CEO of NFHA. "Each day HUD holds up requiring jurisdictions to fully comply with the law is another day that millions of people are being denied fair housing opportunities. HUD's action is a clear example of 'justice delayed, justice denied'."
The need for vigorous HUD oversight of its grantees' compliance with fair housing laws is especially apparent in Texas. Plaintiffs Texas Appleseed and Texas Housers have a long track record of working to ensure the equitable use of federal housing and community development funds in the communities they serve, particularly in the aftermath of devastating hurricanes. The AFFH Rule is needed now more than ever as a bulwark against an unequal rebuilding process in the wake of Hurricane Harvey.
"We have spent over a decade working with state and local governments to provide understanding that segregation is not an accident--it is the product of decades of intentional government policy," said Madison Sloan, Director of Texas Appleseed's Disaster Recovery & Fair Housing Project. "Reversing segregation is critical--and not just for the communities that have been denied access to safe, decent neighborhoods through exclusion and disinvestment. It is research-based policy that benefits everyone. HUD's unlawful suspension of the AFFH rule is a huge step backward in the movement to create equitable, inclusive communities."
"Today, we challenge HUD's outrageous disregard of a landmark civil rights law. Fifty years after our nation made a commitment to end housing discrimination, too many cities and states still use government funds in ways that deprive people of housing choices and maintain residential segregation," said Christina Rosales, Communications Director of Texas Housers. "HUD painstakingly engaged in a multi-year public process to create a rule to put a stop to these illegal actions. Then in January, without due process and in violation of HUD's sacred obligation, Secretary Carson suspended that rule and has forsaken civil rights enforcement. Since Secretary Carson has refused to do his job, we ask the courts to direct him to do so."
"It took HUD almost 50 years to create an effective way to 'affirmatively further' fair housing--one that would actually eliminate the barriers that keep people of color trapped in segregated, low-opportunity neighborhoods," said Sherrilyn Ifill, LDF President and Director-Counsel. "For Secretary Ben Carson and HUD to wipe away the rule just as it was beginning to take effect is shameful and contradicts what has been a fundamental principle of HUD's mission. The court must order HUD to reinstate this critical rule and ensure that the agency does not take any arbitrary or illegal actions that threaten access to safe and affordable housing."
"The communities we work with have looked to the AFFH Rule to realize the legacy of the civil rights movement, and to help fulfill their modern-day dreams of equality and racial inclusion. This administration has chosen to obstruct that progress. With the rule suspended, our tax dollars will continue to be used, in effect, to underwrite continuing segregation, lack of housing choice, and unequal opportunity throughout our country. We must restore the AFFH Rule and together move forward again," said Megan Haberle, Deputy Director of PRRAC.
"What HUD has done in suspending the AFFH Rule can only be described as dereliction of its solemn duty to ensure that federal housing funds are distributed only to jurisdictions that comply with their civil rights obligations," said Michael Allen, partner in the civil rights firm Relman, Dane & Colfax. "Flouting the rule of law, HUD's action signals to every jurisdiction in the country that there will be no consequence for civil rights violations, and that HUD has no interest in helping cities, counties and states to expand housing opportunities for their residents."
"Domestic violence is a primary cause of homelessness for women and children. The AFFH rule played a crucial role in prompting communities to address the fair housing needs of domestic violence survivors, families with children, and others who have long been ignored. It needs to be reinstated," said Sandra Park, Senior Staff Attorney with the ACLU's Women's Rights Project.
Read the full complaint, here.
The Lawyers' Committee is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to enlist the private bar's leadership and resources in combating racial discrimination and the resulting inequality of opportunity - work that continues to be vital today.
(202) 662-8600LATEST NEWS
Bondi Shreds Biden-Era Protections for Journalists as Trump White House Hunts Leakers
One critic warned that President Donald Trump "almost certainly will abuse the legal system to investigate and prosecute his critics and the journalists they talk to."
Apr 28, 2025
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has scrapped a Biden-era policy that sharply restricted the Justice Department's ability to seize journalists' records and force them to testify in leak investigations, an alarming move that press freedom advocates said carries dire implications for reporters and whistleblowers.
In an internal memo first reported Friday by CBS News, Bondi wrote that the Justice Department "will not tolerate unauthorized disclosures that undermine President [Donald] Trump's policies, victimize government agencies, and cause harm to the American people."
"The perpetrators of these leaks aid our foreign adversaries by spilling sensitive and sometimes classified information onto the Internet. The damage is significant and irreversible," Bondi continued. "Accountability, including criminal prosecutions, is necessary to set a new course."
As part of a renewed crackdown on leaks, Bondi said she is issuing revised Justice Department regulations stating that media outlets "must answer subpoenas" related to efforts to uncover sources of unauthorized disclosures within the federal government.
"The policy contemplates the use of subpoenas, court orders, and search warrants to compel production of information and testimony by and relating to members of the news media, subject to the Privacy Protection Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000aa, and the approval of the department's leadership in some instances," the memo states. "The attorney general must also approve efforts to question or arrest members of the news media."
"Some of the most consequential reporting in U.S. history—from Watergate to warrantless wiretapping after 9/11—was and continues to be made possible because reporters have been able to protect the identities of confidential sources."
The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF)—a group co-founded by the late Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked classified documents that came to be known as the Pentagon Papers—noted in a statement that Bondi's memo followed "news that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard asked the Department of Justice to investigate recent leaks to reporters."
Seth Stern, FPF's advocacy director, said Bondi's move was made possible by lawmakers' failure to pass the PRESS Act, bipartisan legislation would have codified into law rules prohibiting the federal government from forcing journalists or telecom companies from disclosing information about their sources.
"Every Democrat who put the PRESS Act on the back burner when they had the opportunity to pass a bipartisan bill codifying journalist-source confidentiality should be ashamed," said Stern. "Everyone predicted this would happen in a second Trump administration, yet politicians in a position to prevent it prioritized empty rhetoric over putting up a meaningful fight."
"Because of them," Stern added, "a president who threatens journalists with prison rape for protecting their sources and says reporting critically on his administration should be illegal can and almost certainly will abuse the legal system to investigate and prosecute his critics and the journalists they talk to."
After his victory in the 2024 presidential election, Trump instructed Republicans to block the PRESS Act, writing on his social media platform, "REPUBLICANS MUST KILL THIS BILL!"
Since the start of his second term, Trump has launched what Reporters Without Borders (RSF) characterized as "a monumental assault on press freedom," including by engaging in "legal intimidation" against media outlets.
"When you step back and look at the whole picture, the pattern of blows to press freedom is quite clear," Clayton Weimers, executive director of RSF North America, said late last week. "RSF refuses to accept this massive attack on press freedom as the new normal. We will continue to call out these assaults against the press and use every means at our disposal to fight back against them. We urge every American who values press freedom to do the same."
Earlier this month, the Committee to Protect Journalists issued a safety advisory to journalists planning to visit the United States, warning "journalists who are at high risk of being detained at the border" to "consider leaving their personal and/or work devices at home and instead carry separate devices and a new SIM card."
Bruce Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said in a statement following Bondi's memo that "strong protections for journalists serve the American public by safeguarding the free flow of information."
"Some of the most consequential reporting in U.S. history—from Watergate to warrantless wiretapping after 9/11—was and continues to be made possible because reporters have been able to protect the identities of confidential sources and uncover and report stories that matter to people across the political spectrum," Brown said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Unveils Plan to Give $150 Billion More to Pentagon
"Any additional money pumped into this system is likely to be wasted," said one analyst. "The only beneficiaries will be weapons contractors."
Apr 28, 2025
Congressional Republicans on Sunday released legislation that would pump an additional $150 billion into the Pentagon—a morass of waste and profiteering—over the next decade as part of a sweeping reconciliation package that's also expected to include deep cuts to Medicaid and tax breaks for the wealthy.
The House Armed Services Committee, a major target of weapons industry lobbying, unveiled the plan for what it called "a historic investment of $150 billion to restore America's military capabilities and strengthen our national defense." The panel said the legislation was developed "in close conjunction" with Senate Republicans and President Donald Trump, who is separately pursuing a $1 trillion U.S. military budget for the next fiscal year.
The legislation would direct the new Pentagon funding toward a number of initiatives backed by the president, including a "Golden Dome" missile defense system that experts have called a massive boondoggle that could benefit Elon Musk.
The bill, which is scheduled for a committee markup on Tuesday, also includes $4.5 billion to speed production of the B-21 stealth bomber, a Northrop Grumman-made aircraft capable of delivering nuclear weapons.
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said Sunday that the GOP's proposed Pentagon spending increase is "a glaring example of misplaced priorities."
"This is no time to throw more money at a weapons manufacturing base that is already maxed out," said Hartung. "Any additional money pumped into this system is likely to be wasted. The only beneficiaries will be weapons contractors, who will be glad to accept the new funds whether they can use them effectively or not."
"Given that the Pentagon and its contractor network are having a hard time spending existing funds well," Hartung added, "Congress should think twice before sending more taxpayer money their way."
The Republican push for additional Pentagon funding comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is facing calls to resign for sharing plans for a U.S. military attack on Yemen in at least two private group chats.
Earlier this month, as Common Dreamsreported, Hegseth endorsed Trump's push for a $1 trillion U.S. military budget, which would mark the highest level of spending since the Second World War.
Keep ReadingShow Less
100 Palestinians Killed in Weekend of Israeli Airstrikes on Gaza
Victims include 22 members of one family massacred in their Gaza City home.
Apr 27, 2025
Israel Defense Forces bombing killed at least 100 Palestinians including numerous women and children in the Gaza Strip over the weekend, while the IDF also renewed airstrikes on Lebanon as cease-fire talks between senior Hamas and Egyptian officials wrapped up in Cairo without any breakthrough.
The Gaza Health Ministry said Sunday that Israeli strikes killed at least 51 Palestinians over the previous 24 hours. Among the victims were eight people, including three women and two children, killed in an IDF bombing of a tent in Khan Younis; a man and four children slain in another strike on a tent in Deir al-Balah; and at least six people who died when a coffee shop near the Bureij refugee camp was hit.
The ministry said Saturday that at least 49 Palestinians were killed during the preceding 24 hours, including 22 members of the al-Khour family who were sheltering in their Gaza City home when it was bombed.
The IDF said the strike targeted a Hamas militant. Israel's military relaxed rules of engagement after the October 7, 2023 attack to allow an unlimited number of civilians to be killed when targeting a single Hamas member, no matter how low-ranking.
Saed al-Khour, who is grieving the loss of his family, refuted Israel's claim, tellingThe Associated Press that "there is no one from the resistance" among the victims.
"We have been pulling out the remains of children, women, and elderly people," al-Khour added.
Israel's U.S.-backed 569-day assault on Gaza has left at least 183,800 Palestinians dead, injured, or missing. Nearly all of Gaza's more than 2 million people have been forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened amid a "complete siege" that is cited in an International Court of Justice genocide case against Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are also fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which issued arrest warrants for the pair last year.
Meanwhile, Israeli forces unleashed a wave of bombing attacks in Lebanon in what critics called a blatant violation of a November cease-fire agreement with the resistance group Hezbollah. The IDF bombed targets in southern Lebanon and in suburbs of the capital city of Beirut.
The IDF, which said it warned residents ahead of the Beirut airstrike, claimed it attacked "an infrastructure where precision missiles" were being stored by Hezbollah, without providing any supporting evidence.
Israel says it will continue its assault and siege on Gaza until Hamas releases the two dozen Israeli and other hostages it has imprisoned since October 2023. Hamas counters that it will only free the hostages in an exchange for Palestinians imprisoned by Israel, a complete withdrawal of IDF troops from Gaza, and a new cease-fire agreement. Israel unilaterally broke a January cease-fire last month.
A senior Hamas delegation left Cairo late Saturday following days of talks regarding a possible deal for a multi-year truce and the release of all remaining hostages. The head of Israel's Mossad spy agency was also in Qatar earlier this week for separate cease-fire talks. Qatari mediators said they believed there has been "some progress" in both sides' willingness to reach an agreement.
United Nations agencies and international humanitarian groups—many of which have accused Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war—have warned in recent days of the imminent risk of renewed famine in Gaza as food stocks run out.
"Children in Gaza are starving," the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
said on social media Sunday. "The government of Israel continues to block the entry of food and other basics. [This is a] man-made and politically motivated starvation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular