The Civil Rights Act of 1968 , (Pub.L. 90-284, 82Ã, Stat.Ã, 73, enacted April 11, 1968), also known as the Fair Housing Law , is an important part of the law in the United States that provides equal housing opportunities regardless of race, religion, or national origin and makes it a federal crime to "by violence or by threats of violence, hurt, intimidate or disturb whether... by reason of race, color, religion, or national origin. "The law was signed into law during the King's murder by President Lyndon B. Johnson, who previously signed the Civil Rights Act and the Law -The right to vote is legal.
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 is generally known as the Fair Housing Act and is intended as a follow-up to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While the Civil Rights Act of 1866 prohibits discrimination In housing, there is no federal law enforcement provisions. 1968 measures were extended to previous acts and prohibited discrimination on the sale, lease, and financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin, and since 1974, sex; since 1988, this law protects persons with disabilities and families with children.
Victims of discrimination may use the 1968 acts and acts of 1866 through section 1983 to seek redress. The 1968 action provided a federal solution while the 1866 action provided a personal solution (ie, civilian clothes).
Title II to VII comprises the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, which applies to Native American tribes of the United States and makes many, but not all, guarantees of the Bill of Rights applicable within the tribes (the Act appeared today in Title 25, section 1301 to 1303 of the United States Code).
A rider bound to the bill makes it a crime to "travel in interstate commerce... with a view to inciting, promoting, encouraging, participating in and committing riots". This provision has been criticized for "equating organized political protest with organized violence".
Video Civil Rights Act of 1968
Konteks politik
One impetus for the legal part comes from the Chicago Open Housing Movement 1966. Also influential is the 1963 Rumford Fair Housing Act in California, backed by NAACP and INTI. and a fair housing campaign in Milwaukee in 1967 led by James Groppi and the NAACP Youth Council. Senator Walter Mondale advocates for the bill in Congress, but notes that for years in a row, a fair federal housing bill is the most common law in US history. It was opposed by most Northern and Southern senators, as well as the National Association of Real Estate Boards. A proposed "Civil Rights Act of 1966" collapsed entirely because of the provision of equitable housing. Mondale commented that:
- Much of [civil rights] [previous] law is about making the South behave and take the teeth from George Wallace... This goes straight to the environment across the country. This is a civil right that becomes personal. ":
Two developments revive the bill. The Kerner Commission's report on the 1967 ghetto riots strongly advocates "a comprehensive and workable federal open housing law", and is quoted regularly by congressional members debating the law. The last breakthrough came with the April 4, 1968 murder of Martin Luther King, Jr., and civil unrest across the country after the death of the King. On April 5, Johnson wrote a letter to the United States House of Representatives urging the issuance of a Fair Housing Act. The Rules Committee, "struck by repeated civic interference outside his door," finally ended his hearing on 8 April. With urgent new attention from legislative director Joseph Califano and Democratic Council Chairman John McCormack, the (previously stalled) bill passed by the House of Representatives by a large margin on April 10.
Maps Civil Rights Act of 1968
Type of prohibited discrimination
The 1968 Civil Rights Act prohibits the following forms of discrimination:
- Disapproval to sell or rent a residence to anyone because of their race, color, religion or national origin. The disabled and families with children were added to the list of classes protected by the Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988; gender was added in 1974 (see below).
- Discrimination against a person in the terms, conditions or privileges of the sale or rental of a residence.
- Advertise a sale or rental of a residence that denotes discrimination preferences based on race, color, religion or nationality (changed by Congress as part of the 1974 Housing and Community Development Act to include gender and, since 1988, people with disabilities and families with children.)
- Forcing, threatening, intimidating, or otherwise interfering with one's pleasure or exercising the right to housing on a discriminatory basis or taking revenge against a person or organization that aids or encourages exercise or enjoys [the right to a fair housing].
The next legislative and judicial changes
In 1988 Congress elected to undermine the plaintiff's ability to prosecute cases of discriminatory treatment in housing. But the Fair Housing Act was also amended in 1988 to allow plaintiffs 'lawyers to recover attorneys' fees. In addition, the 1988 amendment added people with disabilities and families with children to classes covered by the Act.
In the early 1990s, at Trouillon v. The city of Hawthorne, the Defense of Law and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Education Fund successfully challenged urban renewal plans on the basis of race discrimination by bringing in accordance with the Fair Housing Law. Previous litigation under the Act is largely limited to discrimination in buying or renting housing.
Although he decided to support the plaintiffs, Judge Davis continued to deny allegations of discrimination. He said he based his decision partly on the failure of the city to prove that the area had higher crime rates and lower property values ​​than other parts of the city. The city "does not act in bad faith or cheats," Davis wrote. It "does not discriminate against minorities or low or middle income persons and does not violate the Process of Juvenile Justice, Equal Protection or other Civil Rights".
Legitimate discrimination
Only certain types of discrimination are covered by a fair housing law. Landlords are not required by law to rent to any tenants who apply for property. Landlords can select tenants based on objective business criteria, such as the ability of the applicant to pay rent and take care of the property. Landlords can legitimately discriminate tenants with bad credit history or low income, and (except in some areas) should not rent for tenants who will receive a share of 8 vouchers. Landlords must be consistent in screening, treating tenants who are inside and outside protected classes in the same way, and should document the legitimate business grounds for not hiring prospective tenants. In 2010, there was no federal protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity provided, but this protection did exist in some areas.
The US Department of Housing and Urban Development has stated that buyers and tenants may discriminate and may require real-estate agents representing them to restrict home searches to discriminatory parameters. The main purpose of the Fair Housing Act is to protect the right of buyers (and tenants) to find a place to live wherever they choose. It protects the right of the buyer to discriminate by prohibiting certain discriminatory acts by sellers, landlords, and real estate agents.
Housing discrimination
The Civil Rights Act of 1968 defines housing discrimination as "a refusal to sell or rent a residence to anyone because of race, color, religion or national origin". The Title VIII of the Act is usually referred to as the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Later, people with disabilities and families with children are added to this list. The same Office of Equitable Housing and Opportunities in the US Department of Housing and Urban Development is charged with regulating and enforcing this law.
Social steering
Social congestion is a form of housing discrimination involving housing authorities, real estate companies and even local governments that drive certain groups of people, often minorities, to specific areas of a city. According to Realestateagent.com, it is "directing certain races to certain neighborhoods and away from others.Examples are real estate brokers steering black families away from white environments". Some types of housing projects can be taken as examples of steering.
Often housing projects concentrate the poor minority into several buildings or blocks, concentrate the population and isolate them from most cities. Often areas where steering tend to concentrate certain groups of people who lack the resources of the city that may be owned by other parts of the city. For example, in Los Angeles, "ghettos" are not connected to key information circuits like other cities such as educational and cultural media.
In the 1950s, governments across America took the initiative to destroy so-called slums and ghettos in towns, and put up on-site housing projects. These high-rise and density projects were where white people began to encourage blacks who were dislocated by the destruction of the slums, also greatly avoided by the whites. Despite the Fair Housing Act, which includes cases like Gautreaux and Shannon that prohibit exclusively putting the project in a black environment, the trend does not end.
Social rudder can also be outside the institutions of the real estate economy, government policy decisions to build projects. Often people who live in the neighborhood may not be as friendly to people who move as different from them. For example, in 1985 an interracial couple moved to a white neighborhood in Philadelphia. Upon arrival there was an angry mob waving torches and protesting the arrival of the colored man. The attitude of people in certain environments can therefore also contribute to the segregation and steering of people from certain backgrounds.
Before the Fair Housing Law many minorities meet racistly racist objects such as environmental signs or in real estate companies that explicitly say they do not accept certain minorities. However, after the Fair Housing Act, the steering takes on the role of a subtle mode, in which the seller's agent deceives and lies making it more difficult to learn about or rent/buy a home in a particular neighborhood. Minorities are guided or "steered" into an environment with certain economic and racial characteristics.
Case study
A study in Cleveland revealed that 10% of companies in the 1970s practiced racial steering. Recently in 2006 there was an investigation of a real estate company in Chicago, where African-American and white tester testers tried to buy condos. White tester showed more properties - about 36 - while African American testers only saw average 7. This led to the case of Coldwell Banker vs. Illinois Attorney General (2006).
Another study in Detroit shows that white people are rarely displayed at home in non-white environments unless they ask to see it. There are many cases and studies conducted that show the finer end of racial and social steering after the Fair Housing Act. On average, 50% of African-American time is discriminated against when looking for housing.
Redlining
Reduce associated with driving for refusing financial and service support to the environment based on race, ethnicity or economic status. Rather than subtly directing individual families to specific areas or simply providing them with information about a particular racial area, redlining is an overt criterion but legally tolerated for financial institutions to decide where to invest. Derived from the formation of the Federal Housing Administration, this procedure is a protocol to decide where federal, state and city funds will be used for financial services. The upper- and upper-middle-class white areas are inherited in green maps, which means that financial services are clear to give and these areas are desirable for investment. Minor areas, particularly the African-American neighborhood, are outlined in red, meaning they are an unwanted environment where the inhabitants are poor and racial. These maps are used by banking institutions to devise guidelines for lending money. As a result, many of these redline areas, which are also usually located in urban environments where white people tend to move to the American suburbs, experience rapid decline. Because these areas have been ignored and reorganized and can not receive funds from banks to be revitalized, they can not attract businesses, which perpetuate the cycle of poverty. Poverty often leads to crime, and the environment becomes increasingly neglected as they continue to be uninteresting for outside investments, and are continually perfected by banks. Thus private banks and financial institutions and the US government are accused of being responsible for these practices in some instances, which before the Fair Housing Act was widespread and conspicuous throughout the United States. The decline is still done today at a more subtle level. Instead of having official maps circulated to agencies, which are illegal, the public domain may tend to ignore the poor environment by denying basic public services.
Segregation Index
Nancy A. Denton and Douglass S. Massey compiled a segregation index to measure the level of segregation of African-Americans and whites according to income levels. Their goal is to show that African-American discrimination when it comes to housing is unrelated to income levels, which many consider true. Many argue that the continuing separation is that African Americans generally make less money, meaning they can not live in the same environment as rich white people. But when the sorting index by Denton and Massey shows, blacks are still very separate from whites regardless of their income level. For example, in 1980, black families earned $ 25,000 per year or less had an index rate of 86 while those earning $ 50,000 or more had an index level of 83. This trend is common in most metropolitan areas, especially in northern cities. The purpose of this index is to show that upward economic mobility does not affect the degree of segregation in American cities. It should be noted that Denton and Massey also surveyed Hispanic and Asian peoples, and found that the index average was 64, which means that the poorest Hispanics and Asians were still less segregated than the most prosperous blacks. Leslie Carr notes that in 1990, 74 percent of whites lived in the suburbs, while most African Americans and Hispanics live in urban areas, and that African-Americans are the majority population in 14 cities (with populations above 100,000). The purpose of this study is to show that housing practices are racially and non-discriminatory economically.
Legislation
- Civil Rights Act of 1866
- This is a law that states that all people born in the United States are legal citizens. This means they can rent, hold, sell, and buy property. This law is meant to assist former slaves, and those who refuse to grant these new rights to slaves are guilty and punishable by law. A fine of $ 1000 or a maximum of one year in prison.
- The Fair Housing Act of 1968 (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968)
- Extend protection against color, religion, gender and national origin.
- New York State Human Rights Law
- Extends protection of marital and age status, aimed at preventing non-racial discrimination.
- Sections 236 and 237 of the New York State Property Law
- Further extend protection to include residences with children and home car parks. This is intended to protect tenants and sellers from discrimination based on the number of children in the family. The current Fair Housing Act protects against racial discrimination, skin color, national origin, religion, gender, family status, and disability. The law applies to all types of housing, rental homes, apartments, condominiums and homes. The only exception to acting is when the owner of a small rental building lives in the same building he allows. Since he owns the building and also lives there, he can decide who lives there.
Sex Sexual orientation and gender identity
Sexual orientation and gender identity are not protected under the Fair Housing Act; federal law generally does not protect gays and lesbians or other sexual minorities (transgender or transsexual) against discrimination in private housing. There are twenty-two states that have passed laws that prohibit discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Countries that have passed a fair housing law in terms of sexual orientation and gender identity are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Washington State. In addition to the above countries, the following three countries prohibit discrimination in housing solely on the basis of sexual orientation: New Hampshire, New York and Wisconsin. In addition, Austin, Texas has passed laws that make discrimination based on illegal sexual orientation.
In 2012, the US Housing and Urban Development Housing Office on Fair Housing and Equal Opportunities passed a regulation to prohibit LGBT discrimination in government-assisted housing programs. The new regulations ensure that the Department's core housing program is open to all eligible people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Violation of a Fair Housing Act
There are about 2 million cases of housing discrimination each year according to the HUD. The National Fair Housing Alliance, the nation's largest nonprofit housing estimate, estimates that it will be close to 4 million per year, excluding examples of discrimination due to disability or family status. The actual number of violations of the Housing Act is likely to be much higher than 4 million per year. However, between 1989 and 1992 only 17 were admitted to national courts. Thinning is still a big issue even though the law enacted makes it illegal. Studies and investigations have shown that the minority applying for a mortgage is denied three times more than the Caucasian race. According to one Federal Reserve Board study, among the higher-earning applicants, the rate of rejection is as follows:
- An African-American: 21.4%
- Latinos: 15.8%
- Asians: 11.2%
- White: 8.5%
Housing projects are also attacked by researchers and NGOs. Housing supporters Elizabeth Julian and Michael Daniel stated:
In addition to the inequalities in real housing provided to low-income African-American families under the federal program, the environment in which they receive assistance is usually subject to a variety of adverse conditions not found in the neighborhood surrounding housing units where white people receive the same assistance. These conditions include facilities and services provided by inadequate towns, little or no new or newer housing, substantial substantial non-substandard structures, hazardous environmental conditions, inadequate or nonexistent environmental service facilities, high crime, inadequate access to work centers, and little or no new capital investment in the region by public and private entities.
Thus, this discrimination goes beyond being poor as white housing projects receive more attention and public investment, making overall housing discrimination a racial issue.
Although some legal steps have been taken to protect all types of people against housing discrimination in the US, the most commonly targeted and largest victims are African-Americans.
Terms of crime
The Civil Rights Act of 1968 also stipulates 18 USCÃ,§ 245 (b) (2), which enables federal prosecution of anyone who "willingly harms, intimidates or harasses others, or tries to do so, by force because of race, color, religion or other country's origin "[1] because the victim's attempts to engage in one of six federal-protected activities, such as attending school, lowering public places/facilities, applying for a job, acting as a jury in state court or voting.
People who violate this law face a fine or imprisonment up to a year, or both. If a bodily injury occurs or if the act of intimidation involves the use of firearms, explosives or fire, the individual may receive up to 10 years in prison, while crimes involving abduction, sexual assault or murder may be sentenced to life in prison or death sentence.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments