Anti-Discrimination Center

A year after the Consent Decree was entered, Westchester shows every indication of its intention to continue to defy the lawful order of a federal court, and those with the governmental authority and responsibility to seek to vindicate that order have failed to do so.

Astorino continues to insist on using a term that "conflates fair housing with affordable housing and obscures the County's obligations" to affirmatively further fair housing. 

Editorial recites County Executive's flat-out rejection of County's obligation to sue resistant municipalities in addition to the "expression of non-compliance" represented by the veto of source-of-income legislation.  

County Executive has been making clear throughout the sixth months of his tenure that he has no intention of complying with terms of the binding federal court order that resolved ADC's lawsuit against Westchester.  Never being called to account has just emboldened his further non-compliance.  Will HUD and the Monitor understand what is going on here? 

Measure is temporary.  County Executive went through entire 2010 legislative process without fulfilling his Settlement Order obligation to promote a permanent anti-discrimination provision.

For the first time HUD will require grant applicants seeking federal funding to comply with state and local anti-discrimination laws protecting LGBT individuals.

Settlement requires Texas to conduct a new Analysis of Impediments to fair housing choice, document how its and Texas municipalities' expenditures comply with theobligation to affirmatively further, and enhance segregation-reducing mobility options.

In a unanimous decision, unique City Law provision always holding employers liable for discriminatory acts of their managers and supervisors is upheld.

A new article in Clearinghouse Review discusses the genesis and litigation of ADC's Westchester False Claims case, and the resulting Settlement Order.

The argument that the people who will be living in the housing constructed pursuant to the Settlement Order won't have automobiles (and thus development must be narrowly restricted to areas in walking distance of mass transportation) is simply not fact-based.

As many as 10,500 vouchers at risk due to Housing Authority's failure to plan.

NYU study shows how "downzoning" in certain neighborhoods restricts fair housing choice.

Agency cites inadequacies; next step is for Monitor to vindicate integrity of Settlement Order.

After holding town hall meetings in Chicago, San Francisco, and New York, HUD asks people across the county to speak out about LGBT housing discrimination.

The Department of Education announces intention to intensify civil rights enforcement in U.S. schools, attempting to close racial and ethnic disparities in programs and college preparation.

HUD-Sponsored Forum a Prelude to HUD Study of Extent of Discrimination.

Advocates give government officials "snapshot" of human rights concerns in New York City.

Three years after the FBI pledged to investigate more than 100 unsolved civil rights killings, the agency is ready to close all but a handful.

Fair housing case involved display of racially hostile materials by employee of one of the largest owners and operators of multifamily dwellings.

"When one thinks about segregation," Times editorial writes, "Westchester isn’t the first place that comes to mind. But the poor and minority residents desperately looking for an affordable place to live know the bitter truth. It is past time for Westchester’s leaders to do what they’ve promised."

Editorial notes that home rule doesn't mean absolute rule, not where fair housing choice is concerned.

In testimony to a Congressional Committee, Assistant Secretary Trasviña promises "a Department-wide commitment to incorporate our mandate to affirmatively furthering fair housing into all of our work so that we can fulfill our shared goal of truly integrated and balanced living patterns," and asserts that HUD is "working together" with Westchester County to "ensure" that the Settlement Order that emerged from ADC's false claims case against the County "produces real change in Westchester."

A federal judge has ruled that the restrictive new federal proof standard in age discrimination litigation -- "but for" causation -- does not apply to the New York City Human Rights Law because the Local Civil Rights Restoration Act made clear that the local law is intended to be interpreted independently, with federal law serving only as a floor, not a ceiling.  As such, age claims under the City HRL will continue to use the "motivating factor" test.

A delegation from the Westchester County Board of Legislators met with the court-appointed Monitor on November 25th.  Despite the fact that members of the group pushed for at least one fundamental segregation-perpetuating change to the Settlement Order, the Monitor praised what he called the delegation's "continued commitment to this process."  The exchange highlights a troubling dynamic that has apparently taken hold.

County Legislature Gives Final Approvals to Westchester Desegregation Agreement, But Major Compliance Issues Loom from the Outset

As with everything else, the answers are plain if one examines the Settlement Order.  Most concerns are not really about "vagueness," but about the fact that the Settlement Order is written to be enforceable.

Find out how many housing units that the Settlement Order reserves for African-Americans.

Pedro Espada continues to stall most legislation designed to provide new life to the rent-regulation system that the Pataki administration tried to kill.

It is Westchester, not HUD, that is responsible for the consequences of the County's failure to meet basic fair housing planning and performance requirements.  Read the Center's statement. 

New report from Center for an Urban Future finds a wide gap between the means of most New Yorkers and the costs of living in the city.

A federal District Court Judge has ruled that the language of the New York City Human Rights Law is to be respected, and therefore employers are, as the law provides, strictly liability for discriminatory harassment that is engaged in by supervisory or managerial personnel.