The sexual harassment of low-income women by their housing providers is a clear national problem that has only recently become the focus of coordinated nationwide enforcement efforts by federal agencies, including the Department of Justice. While these developments are welcome, the problem requires proactive responses as well. Continue reading
The Supreme Court has held that the language of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) is “broad and inclusive,” and the Court has given it a broad construction. Correspondingly, the traditional interpretive canons suggest that courts must construe exceptions narrowly. However, some courts have restricted coverage under the FHA by broadly reading an exception or by inferring an exception. Continue reading
Fair housing advocates have already brought successful lawsuits challenging the use of property technology (“PropTech”) where it has been found to perpetuate or replicate discriminatory practices in a range of contexts including the use of automated screening tools to evaluate prospective tenants. While substantive interventions in unlawful exclusions and differential treatment via PropTech are laudatory, this Article argues that these steps do not go far enough and moreover, that insufficient attention has been paid to the procedural implications of the federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) as a source of ex ante enforcement. Continue reading
Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is increasingly influencing critical sectors such as housing and finance, and raising concerns about fairness, bias, and regulatory compliance. This Essay explores the policy considerations essential for operationalizing AI fairness, particularly in regulated industries. Continue reading
Despite the promise of the Fair Housing Act and other civil rights laws, racial gaps in wealth, homeownership, and mortgage lending persist today. Our nation’s biggest banks deny mortgage loan applications to Black and Brown consumers at a rate higher than the rest of the industry, often claiming that lending to historically marginalized consumers is too risky. Instead, these lending institutions focus on providing highly profitable financial services to wealthy consumers. Continue reading
All sorts of landlords—governmental landlords, cooperatives, large-scale corporate landlords, and mom-and-pops—engage in slumlording to some degree. Despite that fact, some of the most popular proposed solutions to the problem focus on a property owner’s size and corporate form, rather than its property management practices. Continue reading
The prevalence of default judgments in eviction cases affects housing stability and raises concerns about access to procedural justice for tenants. There is substantial variation across states in the rules governing default judgments that may contribute to variation in the frequency of eviction cases ending in defaults. Continue reading
In Martin v. City of Boise, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit relied on the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the Eighth Amendment to rule that a class of involuntarily unhoused individuals may not be criminally punished for sleeping on public property in the absence of “sufficient alternatives” for all unhoused people. In Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, the Ninth Circuit elaborated that civil schemes which lead to criminal punishment are unconstitutional as well. Continue reading
Coercive control is a pervasive form of domestic violence in which one partner engages in a prolonged and multifaceted campaign of abuse in order to gain and maintain dominance over the other partner. While some coercively controlling partners employ physical violence to ensure compliance with their demands, others use exclusively non-violent tactics. In co-parenting relationships, coercive control not only inflicts severe harm on the targeted parent but also affects children as co-victims of both direct and indirect abuse. As a result, co-victim children suffer significant emotional, developmental, and social harm, and adverse health outcomes, even in the absence of physical abuse. Yet legal frameworks addressing domestic violence typically focus on discrete acts of physical violence, adhering to what scholars term the “violent incident model.” Continue reading
Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act grants the Secretary of Energy a sweeping authority to exempt electric generation and transmission facilities from any federal, state, or local environmental laws. When Congress first adopted § 202(c) in 1935, it designed the provision as an emergency power that federal regulators could use to force fractious utilities to work together to preserve electricity reliability in times of war or natural disaster. But in the last decade things changed.
This Article, drawing on a novel catalog of all § 202(c) emergencies from the provision’s nearly ninety-year history, is the first to comprehensively describe § 202(c). The Article shows that new pressures on the reliability of the American electrical grid, along with an obscure 2015 amendment to the Federal Power Act, transformed § 202(c). No longer is it used to nudge reluctant utilities into action. Instead, starting in the first Trump administration and continuing in the Biden administration, grid operators facing impending blackouts used § 202(c) orders to allow them to run power plants in excess of Clean Air and Clean Water Act pollution limits. And § 202(c) is set to become even more important. Both the Trump and Biden administrations leaned on the provision in proposed policies for the electrical grid—the former to hinder the energy transition and the latter to push it along. This Article tells § 202(c)’s history, describes its transformation, and critically examines some methods for supervising the Department of Energy’s use of § 202(c).