Legislation
In 1934, the practice of redlining neighborhoods emerged through the National Housing Act of 1934. This practice, also known as mortgage discrimination, began when the federal government and the newly formed Federal Housing Administration allowed the Home Owners Loan Corporation to create "residential safety maps," which described the level of safety for real estate investments in 239 cities in the United States. On these maps, high-risk areas were outlined in red, and high-risk areas were considered areas highly populated by African Americans or other minority groups. Many minority neighborhoods were outlined in red on these maps, meaning banks would deny all mortgage equity to people living within them. This contributed to the decline of many of these neighborhoods because the lack of loans to purchase or make repairs to homes made it difficult for these neighborhoods to attract and maintain families. Many urban historians point to redlining as one of the main factors in urban disinvestment and the decline of central cities in the mid-aughts.[44].
This legislation occurred during the New Deal era and provided the foundation for future public housing programs. This law allowed the creation of around 160,000 public housing units. Most of these units were made to alleviate the housing difficulties of the poor and working class suffering from the Great Depression.[1] Additionally, this public housing program allowed the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) to provide various monetary funds to local housing authorities to assist with the construction and development of these units.
The first federal public housing projects were legally segregated by race. In some cases, racially diverse neighborhoods were demolished to make way for segregated government housing. Over time, white middle-class residents moved out of public housing, either by taking advantage of federally subsidized mortgages in the suburbs or by being actively evicted due to lower income thresholds.[45] Vacancies were filled with low-income residents, predominantly minorities excluded from other government programs, who faced ongoing racial discrimination and made up the majority of the poor population at the time.[9]
At the end of World War II, the G.I. Bill promoted segregation practices by keeping African Americans out of European American neighborhoods, showing another side of African American housing discrimination. When millions of American soldiers returned home from abroad, they took advantage of the "Military Readjustment Act" or the American GI Bill. This important document was signed in 1944 by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and provided education and training opportunities for veterans, guaranteed loans for homes, farms or businesses, assistance in finding work, and unemployment payments of $20 per week for up to 52 weeks if a veteran could not find work.
African Americans encountered discrimination when trying to buy a home in overwhelmingly European American neighborhoods. Realtors did not show these houses to African Americans, and when they did, they tried to convince them not to buy the house. This discrimination was based on the fact that real estate agents believed they would lose future business by dealing or listing with African Americans, and that it would be unethical to sell a home in a European American neighborhood to African Americans because it would reduce the property values of surrounding homes.[47].
Both redlining and discrimination through the G.I. Bill. They relegated most African Americans to a concentrated area within the city, so declining property values and higher crime rates could remain in a contained area. The relegation of African Americans to unsupported neighborhoods due to redlining practices was a self-fulfilling prophecy that created the high-crime slums the city feared.[6].
Overtly discriminatory sales and loan rejection practices continued unabated until at least 1968, when the Fair Housing Act was passed. After this law was passed, outright refusal to sell property to African Americans became rare, as such behavior could lead to prosecution under the Fair Housing Act.[6] The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Anyone who believes they have faced housing discrimination because of their race can file a fair housing complaint.
The most comprehensive federal fair housing law of its time, this legislation mandated fair housing as national policy and restricted discriminatory practices. Specifically, discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin was prohibited in the rental, sale, financing, and brokerage of housing or housing services. However, this law did not give the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) much power to enforce the law. HUD was only allowed to mediate housing discrimination disputes between the parties. He did not have the power to file lawsuits or take definitive legal action.[4].
During his presidential term, Nixon's federal housing policy undermined the Fair Housing Act. His policy recognized that federal law requires nondiscriminatory practices in federal housing matters, but he did not provide presidential support. Nixon declared that the government could not force suburban desegregation or economic/racial integration. In doing so, he secured many suburban votes, but further exacerbated the problem of housing inequality by not supporting subsidized housing programs to aid desegregation.[4].
The Equal Credit Opportunity Act provided protection against creditor discrimination. It stated that creditors could not discriminate against applicants on the basis of race, sex, marital status, religion, ethnicity or age. Designed to complement the Fair Housing Act on specific forms of housing discrimination, this legislation offered more protection against discrimination in lending practices.[4].
Like the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974, this legislation was also designed to supplement the Fair Housing Act in specific areas of housing discrimination. This law protected applicants from discrimination across lending institutions by requiring any financial institution that provides federally-related mortgage loans to disclose data annually. This included reporting on the amount and location of federal housing-related loans (by census tract or zip code). The purpose of this was to prevent discrimination. credit in certain locations.[4].
The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 required banks to apply the same anti-discrimination guidelines to their lending criteria in all circumstances. However, these acts did not completely stop discriminatory practices. Discrimination transitioned to more subtle techniques, including racial targeting and misinformation given to potential African-American buyers. Although these laws exist in theory, they have not achieved their goal of eradicating race-based discrimination in the housing market. Audits of the housing market in Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, and many other major metropolitan areas have shown that discrimination toward African Americans continued into the 1980s, long after anti-discrimination laws were passed.[6].
Trends by minority group
Residential segregation is generally measured by uniformity and exposure. Evenness is defined as the relative dispersion of a given racial group in a metropolitan area, while exposure is defined as how much a member of a given racial group is exposed to a member of another racial group.[5][7] Overall, the number of integrated neighborhoods has continued to increase since the passage of the Fair Housing Act in 1968. Additionally, the number of all-white neighborhoods has been decreasing.[7] Although there has been an increase in the presence of minority populations in the suburbs, the Residential segregation continues to persist. On average, minority groups are more likely to be exposed to mixed neighborhoods than white populations.[5][7] Residential segregation is not limited to the private housing market. Discriminatory practices also occur within the federal public housing system.[1].
Overall, in the period between 1980 and 2000, residential segregation between black and white populations has declined at a greater rate than other minority groups.[5] However, the African-American population, currently the second largest minority group in the United States, still experiences the greatest residential segregation compared to other minority groups.[7] Older industrial cities in the Midwest and Northeast experience the highest levels of black-white residential segregation. , while newer metropolitan areas in the South experience lower levels of residential segregation between whites and blacks. The presence of a black population in the suburbs continues to increase with 40% of African Americans currently living in the suburbs.[5].
Due to immigration to the United States in recent decades, the Latino population has grown exponentially, making Latinos the largest minority group in the United States. After African Americans, Latinos experience the second highest level of residential segregation. From 1980 to 2000, the level of dissimilarity and neighborhood isolation increased between the Latino population and the white population. Although about 50% of Latinos live in suburban areas, it is projected that with increased immigration, the divide between Latino and white populations will continue to persist in residential areas.[5].
Asians in the United States are a diverse group with complex historical backgrounds.[48] Chinese Americans first arrived in the United States in the mid-1800s during the California Gold Rush, and Japanese Americans immigrated to the United States in the late 1800s as indentured servants. These populations faced systemic discrimination that forced them to live together, particularly segregating into specific national origin groups in major cities. Asian immigration to the US increased in the 1960s after the reform and passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Due to immigration to the United States in recent decades, the Asian population has grown considerably, making Asians the third largest minority group in the United States.[5] Like Latino and Black minority groups, the Asian minority group experiences high levels of isolation and dissimilarity with their peers. white counterparts. From 1980 to 2000, these levels have only increased. Currently, 55% of Asians live in the suburban area, but their levels of isolation from their white counterparts have increased over time despite residential mobility.[5] Several factors can contribute to residential isolation, including recent immigration status, level of English language proficiency, and level of acculturation in American society. Socioeconomic status can also contribute to residential segregation, and Chinatowns in the United States continue to represent a large concentration of Asian poverty.[49].