Jim Crow North and Fair Housing Enforcement

This article investigates how the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 (commonly referred to as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) has been enforced in northeastern states. Using data obtained from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the Freedom of Information Act, it measures the extent to which the thirteen northeastern states—from Maine to Virginia—decided Fair Housing Act complaints in favor of Black and Latino Americans from 1989 to 2010. First, the analysis reveals considerable variations in favorable outcomes across the northeast, even between adjacent states with similar demographic traits. This suggests that governmental jurisdictions in the country’s various regions can differ noticeably in terms of their support for Title VIII complainants and that it makes a difference in what region, state, or locality a Title VIII complaint is filed in by a person alleging housing discrimination. Second, the analysis demonstrates that Black complainants are most likely to win their Title VIII claims in federal Region I, whereas Latinos are most likely to obtain favorable outcomes in federal Region III. Third, Black and Latino complainants are both least likely to win Title VIII claims in federal Region II, New York and New Jersey. This is surprising given these states’ general reputations as liberal and pioneering. As a result, we explore in greater detail aspects of law, race relations, and public policy in New York and New Jersey to help explain their low rates of favorable outcomes in Fair Housing Act complaints. Four fundamental facts about New York and New Jersey are considered: their high levels of (1) residential, (2) school, and (3) economic segregation, as well as (4) their lack of local jurisdictions participating in HUD’s Fair Housing Assistance Program. Our results cannot prove that Region II’s low favorability rates in Title VIII cases are caused by one or more of these four factors, yet they do strongly suggest that such a causal link is plausible.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Columbia Journal of Race and Law
Published
2025-08-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v15i1.14164
Primary Topic
Homelessness and Social Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Jim Crow North and Fair Housing Enforcement

Charles S. Bullock, Charles M. Lamb
Columbia Journal of Race and Law
Homelessness and Social Issues
article

Jim Crow North and Fair Housing Enforcement

Charles S. Bullock, Charles M. Lamb
article en

Abstract

This article investigates how the federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 (commonly referred to as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) has been enforced in northeastern states. Using data obtained from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the Freedom of Information Act, it measures the extent to which the thirteen northeastern states—from Maine to Virginia—decided Fair Housing Act complaints in favor of Black and Latino Americans from 1989 to 2010. First, the analysis reveals considerable variations in favorable outcomes across the northeast, even between adjacent states with similar demographic traits. This suggests that governmental jurisdictions in the country’s various regions can differ noticeably in terms of their support for Title VIII complainants and that it makes a difference in what region, state, or locality a Title VIII complaint is filed in by a person alleging housing discrimination. Second, the analysis demonstrates that Black complainants are most likely to win their Title VIII claims in federal Region I, whereas Latinos are most likely to obtain favorable outcomes in federal Region III. Third, Black and Latino complainants are both least likely to win Title VIII claims in federal Region II, New York and New Jersey. This is surprising given these states’ general reputations as liberal and pioneering. As a result, we explore in greater detail aspects of law, race relations, and public policy in New York and New Jersey to help explain their low rates of favorable outcomes in Fair Housing Act complaints. Four fundamental facts about New York and New Jersey are considered: their high levels of (1) residential, (2) school, and (3) economic segregation, as well as (4) their lack of local jurisdictions participating in HUD’s Fair Housing Assistance Program. Our results cannot prove that Region II’s low favorability rates in Title VIII cases are caused by one or more of these four factors, yet they do strongly suggest that such a causal link is plausible.

Columbia Journal of Race and LawVol. 15(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Homelessness and Social Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Jim Crow North and Fair Housing Enforcement — Charles S. Bullock, Charles M. Lamb · Columbia Journal of Race and Law (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS