Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fair Housing Disparate Impact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would codify disparate‑impact standard for fair-housing enforcement at state level
Summary
Delegate Krystal Tavares presented HB 12 39 to preserve disparate‑impact enforcement under Maryland law in case federal protections change; the Attorney General’s office provided technical explanation of the Inclusive Communities three‑part test and committee members asked how the standard
Delegate Krystal Tavares told the committee that House Bill 12 39 would preserve Maryland’s ability to enforce disparate‑impact claims under the state Fair Housing Act in the event of weakening federal enforcement. The sponsor said the bill does not add new protected classes but seeks to ensure the state can apply the federal disparate‑impact framework even if federal policy shifts.
Tavares said she requested the bill after the state attorney general’s office urged a codification to protect enforcement options. “Disparate impact theory is a critical tool in fair housing enforcement,” the sponsor said, citing the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Texas Dept. of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project (2015) as the legal framework.
Deputy Chief Rashida Ogletree of the Maryland Attorney General’s Civil Rights Division explained the Inclusive Communities framework to the committee. “The language that you’re pointing out just lays out the 3 part test and the Inclusive Communities test,” she said. Under that approach, a plaintiff first establishes a statistical disparate impact; a defendant may then show a legitimate business interest; and finally a plaintiff may attempt to show a less discriminatory alternative is available.
Committee members probed several hypotheticals about screening policies such as criminal‑background restrictions and how statistical proof would be shown; Ogletree said the approach focuses on outcomes and uses statistical and contextual evidence to evaluate neutral policies’ disparate effects on protected groups.
Ending: The sponsor pressed that codifying the federal framework at the state level would preserve enforcement options for renters and municipalities if federal policy changes; committee members asked for drafting clarity and technical edits before further action.
