Which statement about disparate impact is true?

Which statement about disparate impact is true?

• A. Disparate impact requires intentional discrimination.
• B. Disparate impact involves neutral policies that have a disproportionately adverse effect on individuals with a protected characteristic.
• C. Disparate impact applies only to advertising content.
• D. Disparate impact is identical to disparate treatment in all cases.

Answer: (B)

Disparate impact focuses on neutral policies that produce a disproportionately adverse effect on people who share a protected characteristic, even if there was no intent to discriminate. In fair housing and related regulations, this means a policy or practice that seems neutral—like a rental screening rule, income threshold, or credit requirement—can still violate the law if it excludes or harms protected groups at a higher rate and is not necessary to achieve a legitimate objective. The issue is about the effects of the policy, not the mover’s motive. This concept differs from the idea that discrimination must be intentional, which is why the statement about requiring intentional discrimination isn’t accurate. It also isn’t limited to advertising content—the theory can apply to any housing policy or practice, not just what’s said in ads. And it’s distinct from disparate treatment, which focuses on intentional discriminatory conduct; disparate impact looks at the consequences of neutral policies, regardless of motive.

Disparate impact focuses on neutral policies that produce a disproportionately adverse effect on people who share a protected characteristic, even if there was no intent to discriminate. In fair housing and related regulations, this means a policy or practice that seems neutral—like a rental screening rule, income threshold, or credit requirement—can still violate the law if it excludes or harms protected groups at a higher rate and is not necessary to achieve a legitimate objective. The issue is about the effects of the policy, not the mover’s motive.

This concept differs from the idea that discrimination must be intentional, which is why the statement about requiring intentional discrimination isn’t accurate. It also isn’t limited to advertising content—the theory can apply to any housing policy or practice, not just what’s said in ads. And it’s distinct from disparate treatment, which focuses on intentional discriminatory conduct; disparate impact looks at the consequences of neutral policies, regardless of motive.