Fair Housing Enforcement in the South and Non‐South*

Bullock, Charles S.; Wilk, Eric M.; Lamb, Charles M.

doi:10.1111/ssqu.12180

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a comparison of fair housing complaints handled by the US federal government with complaints handled by state and local human rights commissions found that southern commissions were more likely to provide an outcome favorable to the complainant, thus providing a justification for SNHRI complaint-handling (and perhaps countering expectations concerning local reluctance to enforce anti-discrimination laws in the southern US). 83…”

Section: E Robustnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Human Rights Institutions and Their Sub-National Counterparts

Wolman

2017

International Human Rights Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article outlines and explores the arguments in favor of and in opposition to the establishment of sub-national human rights institutions (such as state and local human rights commissions, ombudsmen and the like) in nations that already possess national human rights institutions. This analysis will be based on an application of prior research findings in the broader field of administrative decentralisation as tailored to the particularities of human rights implementation. Where relevant, the article also examines the implications of institutional type for decentralisation, as well as the implication of different attributes of the relevant jurisdiction. The article concludes by setting out the circumstances under which the establishment of sub-national human rights institutions will be more or less advantageous.

show abstract

Section: E Robustnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Human Rights Institutions and Their Sub-National Counterparts

Wolman

2017

International Human Rights Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…HUD implements federal fair housing policy by investigating, conciliating, and closing Title VIII complaints. State and local civil rights agencies that assist in Title VIII enforcement under HUD’s Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) use a similar process (Bullock, Lamb, and Wilk 2017; Bullock, Wilk, and Lamb 2015). In fact, the 1968 legislation created a cooperative federalism arrangement: state and local governments that pass housing discrimination laws substantially equivalent to Title VIII in terms of rights, procedures, remedies, and the availability of judicial review have the first opportunity to enforce Title VIII, ahead of the federal government (Lamb and Wilk 2010; HUD 2014).…”

Section: Intergovernmental Enforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bureaucratic Effectiveness and Civil Rights Enforcement

Bullock

Wilk

Lamb

2017

State and Local Government Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article compares federal, state, and local civil rights agencies’ effectiveness in enforcing the Fair Housing Act. Two factors primarily define effective enforcement: whether agencies’ conciliation efforts are more likely to lead to agreements between the parties involved in complaints and whether agencies are more likely to provide remedies to complainants in cases in which there is cause to believe discrimination occurred. The analysis shows that state and local agencies are generally more effective than the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) both at conciliating complaints and at providing remedies. HUD does appear to be more effective than state and local agencies in terms of the dollar amount of monetary relief awarded when successful conciliations occur, but HUD’s remedial effectiveness disappears after controlling for the likelihood of successful conciliations.

show abstract

Local Governments’ Response to Discrimination: A Temporal Framework to Analyze Local Anti-discrimination Policy and Actions

Martiniello,

Verhaeghe

2024

J. Race Ethnicity Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discrimination is widely studied, with extensive research measuring discrimination on the housing and labor markets. This study examines how local governments address this well-documented issue, by conducting content analysis on 45 policy documents and by performing semi-structured in-depth interviews with 24 alder(wo)men and diversity officers across nine Belgian cities. We introduce a temporal framework combining why, what, how, and when local anti-discrimination policy and actions are established. Such a framework is useful, as we do not approach policy as fixed, but pay attention to how actions evolve over time, even within one so-called anti-discrimination policy.This enables scholars and policymakers to identify decision-making patterns, predict changes over time, and understand contextual influences. Besides, unlike existing models rooted in integration or diversity policy, our framework captures the unique aspects of anti-discrimination policy, enabling a thorough understanding of the (non-)adoption of concrete anti-discrimination actions.

show abstract

Fair Housing Enforcement in the South and Non‐South*

Cited by 4 publications

References 22 publications

National Human Rights Institutions and Their Sub-National Counterparts

National Human Rights Institutions and Their Sub-National Counterparts

Bureaucratic Effectiveness and Civil Rights Enforcement

Local Governments’ Response to Discrimination: A Temporal Framework to Analyze Local Anti-discrimination Policy and Actions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About