A federal judge’s ruling rejecting a pernicious legal doctrine supported by Labor Secretary Thomas Perez — and accusing him of gaming the system — is a welcome setback for “disparate impact” and a reminder that Mr. Perez, many liberals’ choice to succeed Eric Holder as attorney general, is unfit for that role.
In a lawsuit filed by insurance industry groups, Judge Richard J. Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected a Department of Housing and Urban Development attempt to allow use of disparate impact — statistical analysis that merely shows different outcomes for different demographic groups — to prove discrimination in Fair Housing Act complaints.
Thus, winning a housing complaint still requires proving intentional discrimination, according to The Washington Times.
The judge said HUD “is yet another example of an administrative agency trying desperately to write into law that which Congress never intended to sanction.” And he called it “troubling” that Perez had avoided a potential Supreme Court ruling against disparate impact by negotiating a settlement that took another case off the justices’ docket.
Hopefully, the Supreme Court will follow Judge Leon’s lead in a disparate impact case now before it. That would reinforce how ill-suited Perez is to be attorney general — and why he never should have become Labor secretary.