Reference no: EM134031836
Assignment:
After reading the Article "Legacy of Redlining: State-Sponsored Segregation and Disenfranchisement of Urban Minority Communities" and " Justice Harlan Dissenting" (pg. 423-429), discuss the following.
1. Discuss the origins of the "Legacy of Redlining" LEGACY OF REDLINING - STATE SP0NSORED SEGREGATION.pdf Download LEGACY OF REDLINING - STATE SP0NSORED SEGREGATION.pdf and if you believe government action contributed to denial of an opportunity to build generational wealth through home ownership for Black citizens, at a time when wealth building opportunities were easily accessible to White citizens? Do you believe that the remnants of redlining continue to contribute to socioeconomic disparities? Explain your answer.
2. Discuss why Justice Harlan's dissent in Plessy v Ferguson (1896) where he states, "the sure guaranty of the peace and security of each race is the clear, distinct, unconditional recognition by our government, national and state, of every right that inheres in civil freedom, and of the equality before the law of all citizens of the United States, without regard to race." (pg. 351) . . . . . . do you believe his statement had historically significant at the time it was made? Is it relevant in a contemporary setting? Explain your answer. Also discuss, how Justice Harlan's "Vision for American Justice" is contradicted by the practice of redlining by the American government.
3. In Buchanan v. Warley (1917), the court addressed a "restrictive covenant" in a purchase agreement for real property. Discuss why the covenant was problematic. In Buchanan the Supreme Court began to dismantle state-sanctioned segregation (at least in appearance). By striking down racial residential segregation ordinances as unreasonable exercises of the police powers (powers of the State) and violation of the Due Process Clause, would you agree the Court took a first step in ending racial segregation? If so, discuss how we explain that in 1934 (beginning of redlining), the government action was in direct contrast to the findings of the Supreme Court in Buchanan, how is this possible? Discuss how housing discrimination practices have changed, or have they changed?