Magner v. Gallagher
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10-1032 | 8th Cir. | Not Argued | Feb 14, 2012 | N/A | N/A | OT 2011 |
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the respondents in this case.
Issue: (1) Whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act; and, if so (2) what test should be used to analyze them.
Plain English Issue: (1) Whether a lawsuit can be brought for a violation of the Fair Housing Act based on a practice that is not discriminatory on its own, but has a discriminatory effect; and, if so, (2) how should courts determine whether a practice has a discriminatory effect and violates the Act?
Judgment: Dismissed - Rule 14 on February 14, 2012.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Fair housing case dismissed (Lyle Denniston, February 10, 2012)
- Petition of the day (Conor McEvily, May 20, 2011)
Merits Briefs for the Petitioners
Amicus Briefs in Support of the Petitioners
- Brief of the International Municipal Lawyers Association”et al.
- Brief of the Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey
- Brief of the Pacific Legal Foundation et al.
- Brief of the Independent Community Bankers of America et al.
- Brief of the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc.
- Brief of the American Bankers Association et al.”
Amicus Briefs in Support of Neither Party
Merits Briefs for the Respondents
Amicus Briefs in Support of the Respondents
- Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund
- Brief of the Lawyer’s Committee on Civil Rights et al.”
- Brief of the Housing Advocates, Inc., and Buckeye Community Hope Foundation
- Brief of the National Fair Housing Alliance et al.”
- Brief of the Opportunity Agenda et al.”
- Brief of the ACLU
- Brief of Massachusetts et al.
- Brief of Henry G. Cisneros
- Brief of AARP and Mount Holly Gardens Citizens In Action
[##CERT-STAGE##]