#fair housing act

[odinsblog]

Donald Trump took the stage in Greensboro, N.C. last Saturday calling for rounding up millions of Latinos across America and putting them in mass detention camps as part of “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.” Unfortunately, this kind of rhetoric has become so common among the MAGA Republican playlist that it’s tempting to see it as a joke. But that wasn’t just somebody’s racist grandfather running off at the mouth or a standup comedian with bad taste playing to the crowd. My parents and grandparents would have called it a dog whistle, but my generation should know it’s a bullhorn. But whatever you call it, it was calculated, drafted, tested and approved as part of the far-right Project 2025 plan to turn back the clock on civil rights, women’s rights, workers’ rights and democracy itself. It was the white Christian nationalist agenda on full public display in all its un-American glory and we can’t afford to take it lightly.

Now, if you haven’t heard about Project 2025, don’t feel bad. Most people haven’t. Founded in 2022 by the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, it’s an organization led by Trump insiders preparing for one nation under Trump if the twice impeached and four times indicted former president wins the November election and to call them dangerous is an understatement.

What do you think about overhauling federal law enforcement so that the Department of Justice and the FBI, designed to be independent and insulated from political influence, were controlled directly by a newly elected and emboldened President Trump so he could protect his minions from investigation, arrest and prosecution no matter how many laws they broke? Project 2025 loves the idea.

Want to bypass the Senate confirmation process and stop notifying Congress when we sell weapons to foreign governments? Project 2025 does. What about terminating every diversity, equity and inclusion program in the federal government? Project 2025 says right on. What do you think about invoking martial law, using the military as local law enforcement and locking up Trump opponents? Project 2025 calls that progress.

But how do they plan on doing all this? After all, the federal government is more than just one person in the Oval Office. Trump already learned that lesson when federal employees and even some of his own appointees refused to break the law just because he said so.

But Project 2025 has a solution to that roadblock. They call it Schedule F and it’s a plan to fire as many as 50,000 federal employees and replace them with dyed-in-the-wool MAGA fanatics who swear their loyalty not to America or the Constitution but to Donald J. Trump. They’re not even trying to keep it a secret. But why would they?

You see, Project 2025 isn’t confused about who they are. They’re the MAGA Manifesto committed to the unapologetic vision of right-wing nationalism and they don’t care who knows it. Let’s be honest, these guys are attacking President Biden for pushing “racial equity in every area of our national life, including in employment.” Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Are we supposed to think our president should not be fighting for equality and justice?

That’s what Project 2025 says. But that shouldn’t surprise us. After all, they don’t think folks who look like me are real Americans. Neither does Trump.

But they’re not clowns. They’re highly trained, well-funded political operatives dedicated to winning in November and remaking America in their white nationalist image. They’ve spent the past two years putting together a plan to do just that setting the highest stakes imaginable for this election.

(continue reading)

[bursting-at-the-seems]

Housing Disability Discrimination Support

Hi everyone,

I'm reaching out to share my experience with my LL and to seek advice or support as I believe I am experiencing disability discrimination.

Questions:

Am I on the right track? Are they in violation?

What to I do next?

Can I represent myself? Do I need an attorney?

Is it time to file state and federal reports?

Know of an AZ attorney who can help?

Summary:

I've been facing significant issues with my landlord (LL) regarding delayed disability accommodations and incorrect billing. Despite requesting accommodations over three months ago, they has not resolved the issue. Additionally they have made billing errors, including unauthorized charges and fees that are connected to my accommodation request, and they have failed to communicate effectively. Additionally, their legal counsel has used ableist language and derailed conversations about accommodations, seemingly to discourage me from pursuing my rights; I also think they are misrepresenting the law. This situation has caused undue hardship, and I believe their actions may constitute harassment and discrimination under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), Americans with Disability Act, and Arizona Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (ARLTA). At this point I am prepared to take legal action if necessary and am seeking advice or support from others who may have faced similar issues.

Context:

- I and two roommates have lived here for 4 years. In December, my symptoms got worse, and I was diagnosed with chronic conditions. We have been in an ADA unit for 3 of the 4 years.

- I pay for a garage, one roommate pays for a carport, and the other utilizes the free parking option. There is no ADA parking on the shortest route to our ADA dwelling. Free ADA parking spaces are not accessible to me due to having to cross a parking lot and other spaces or walk through a handful of hallways.

- Many tenants complain of a lack of parking and often need to park far from dwellings, park illegally, in another’s paid spot, or leave the complex to park elsewhere.

- All dwellings aside from ADA units have top-loading washers. E-check payments can only have 2 fails before being revoked. During my flare of symptoms and unexpected medical costs, we had two fails. Our first two in 4 years.

- This is a privately owned complex with more than 4 units, built in 2009. AZ has one-party consent recording laws. LL office has a history of not answering the phone.

Timeline:

April:

-Concern (confidential per agreement)

-During this concern I began learning about my rights with regards to my disabilities

-Concern resolved

-Accommodations requested

-documentation submitted (doctors note, state issued Handicap Card)

-Maintenance staff states it would be easy to provide top loading washer, could do it right away

May:

-Attorney pushback need new medical note (dr signature not seen), states ADA doesn’t apply, doesn’t understand nexus

-New Medical Note submitted

-Detailed explanation o f nexus over and above required

-Lawyer states LL Not obligated to pay for modifications

-Approves some modifications at my expense

-Approves reinstatement of my ability to make echeck payments, one additional chance only

-Does not approve transition to top loading washer or elevating washer per doctors note or accessible parking

-LL legal rep implies I should be grateful for the upgrade despite stating why it is not accessible for me

-LL legal rep states ADA has no relevance

-LL states they have other top loading machines available but don’t want to have to deal with/ store our front loading.

-LL legal rejects accessible washer and dryer accommodation and accessible parking does not offer alternative solution

-LL states they will have maintenance build block under washer to raise it despite LL legal rep decline (this has been provided)

-LL legal rep states keep paying for garage or use covered parking space, despite covered spot irrelevance as it is another tenants

June:

-payed June invoice via e-check since ability reinstated (documented)

-Lease on dwelling needs to be renewed at the end of month, in reviewing contract notice garage rent has increased by ~67%

-Called City of Gilbert to review ada parking codes, informed that if in an ADA unit FHA states that there must be an ada parking space on shortest route to dwelling. Recorded call.

-Emailed regarding lease renewal and ongoing parking discussion pushing back on increase and restating my request for accessible parking accommodation

-LL legal rep states there is no such thing as an ADA unit, despite the property management referring to it as it and it being a colloquially accepted term.

-LL rep states they do not see why I need accessible parking when I pay for a garage, and we have a covered spot and nothing LL needs to do. That the city is incorrect.

-Push back on this, reexplain that I would give up my garage if g tr here was a free accessible parking option and once again that the covered spot belongs to another tenant.

- nearing lease deadline, reached out asking if we can sign bur leave the garage terms out until resolved or have an extension without fee

-Followed up again with no response onexpiring lease options, highlighting unresolved disability accommodations initially requested in April (over 3 months without resolution).

- LL acknowledged the need for review and suggested a month-to-month (MTM) option at no extra cost until disputes over increased garage rent and the request for accessible parking are resolved.(Documented)

- Received recurring payment reminder, states billing amounts may change based on account balance, account balance is controlled by LL

- while not required as auto pay established, checked ledger around 10pm on 6/30 and saw an amount of $99.76. (Documented)

July:

- In July 1 discovered LL increased the bill and auto-billed $2,943.81, including fees previously agreed not to charge (MTM fee and disputed garage cost).

- Called LLtwice, no response.

- Visited the leasing office with roommate 1; charges were adjusted but a refund was refused. LL assistant manager (am) asserted that only a credit for the following month could be issued, leaving us without $500 in our budget. LLAM said, “It’s not fair but that’s how it is.” Suggested we stop check if we needed another solution. The conversation was recorded.

- Emailed LL with an update.

- Called the bank and was informed of a $30 fee for stopping the check.

- Called LL and spoke with LLAM she stated LL would not cover the canceled check fee. Reminded LLAM this issue arose due to LL oversight and they should bear the fees. -Discussed an alternative solution of letting the check bounce, which LLAM confirmed would not incur a fee and would allow continued e-check payments per the accommodation terms, without a late fee. This call was witnessed by another resident.

- Emailed LL to summarize the call and communicated that we would not return from our holiday until July 7 and would make the payment once there was confirmation that the check had not gone through.

- LL acknowledged the situation, mentioned a grace period for late fees but incorrectly stated that we chose to make an overpayment.

-July 4 Leasing office closed.

-July 8 Received notice that the check was rejected by SanTan upon our return from holiday, attempted payment but was unable to do so online, called the office but was unable to connect with staff.

-July 9 Attempted payment again and found additional fees despite agreements from LL,LLAM

- Received a threatening eviction notice on the door with no prior communication from the leasing office.

-Emailed LL all the above, proving that we did not choose to make this payment; it resulted from LL error in not updating the system per the agreement to not charge for MTM or the disputed garage fee. The auto payment was triggered by LL incorrect managing of account balance despite stating we would not be charged fees and late payment was due to LLAM not following through with commitments on being able to make e-check payment and no fees.

-July Three calls to the office from various residents of 1086 went unanswered.

- Sent an email to LL seeking resolution.

- Follow-up emails from LL and LLAM stating they will get back to us

- Conversation with LL over the phone, who inaccurately asserted that the overpayment was our mistake and held us responsible for all fees. Clarified that the June 30 and July 1 amounts were both incorrect, and the automated payments were managed by LL. Call recorded.

- Left a voicemail for LL corporate office

- Paid July rent, excluding disputed fees and deducting $10 for the cashier check charge that was only needed to be obtained due to LL Error. LL spoke to other roommates incorrectly stating they didn’t understand why I chose to over pay. Roommate 2 states, auto payment controlled by them, and we had checked which we should not have needed to do -no one is checking their Spotify auto payments - recorded

- Submitted formal complaint for delayed accommodation and billing error highlighting the above information

- LL said was not needed as they had been communicating and that the billing and requests are a separate issue - says accepted partial payment as curtesy

- LL legal rep responds to earlier email, not formal complaint, and again rejects accessible parking accommodation, says not needed despite documentation, to keep paying or use other tenants spot, no other option provided, states rate increase is not discriminatory, says this is the last of the matter.

-LL states we are to sign lease by Aug 1, no reinstatement of epayment, offered to cover $80 of fees and we are responsible for over $250

-LL sends this in three separate emails

- Forwards Formal complaint to senior LL corporate staff, LL legal rep, and LL. States that billing errors and the 3 month delay in accommodation are inherently linked as the LL said no fee to extend while we sort through accommodation, then failed to ensure their billing was correct and put burden on me.

Key Points:

Untimely Resolution of Accommodation Request: Over three months have passed since the initial request for disability accommodations, an excessive and legally questionable delay under the Fair Housing Act.

Potential Delay Tactics: It appears that LL may have deliberately delayed the accommodation process, which coincided with our lease renewal period. This delay tactic is concerning as it suggests an attempt to force us out of the premises, especially given the sudden notice of five days provided after their billing mistake.

Legal Counsel's Conduct: LL legal counsel has repeatedly used ableist language and derailed conversations about accommodations by fixating on irrelevant information and nitpicking colloquial language. This appears to be an intentional strategy to wear out disabled tenants and discourage them from pursuing their rightful accommodations.

Legal Implications: Potential disability discrimination due to unresolved accommodation requests and mishandling of billing.

Definition of Harassment in Housing Context: Harassment in a housing context includes actions that create a hostile living environment, repeated and unreasonable demands, or failure to make necessary accommodations, particularly when these actions are taken against someone because of their membership in a protected class (such as individuals with disabilities).

Legal Case Summary:

LL actions constitute a blatant disregard for Arizona state law and federal housing regulations. Under the Arizona Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (ARLTA), landlords are required to maintain fit and habitable premises and make all repairs necessary to keep the premises in a livable condition (A.R.S. § 33-1324). LL repeated billing errors and failure to address accommodations contravene these obligations. Furthermore, under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), it is illegal to discriminate against individuals with disabilities, including failing to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. The excessive delay of over three months in addressing my accommodation request is unreasonable and likely a violation of the FHA. Additionally, the rent increase after the accommodation request, the assertion that paying for accessible parking is the only option, followed by an increase in garage rent (the accessible parking option), and the mishandling of July rent with associated fees and penalties, are all linked and indicative of a pattern of discriminatory and retaliatory behavior by LL. These actions, taken together, create a hostile living environment and impose undue financial and emotional stress potentially constituting harassment. Federal guidelines and best practices indicate that accommodation requests should be acknowledged within 3-5 business days, an interactive process should begin immediately and be completed within 1-2 weeks, and simple modifications should be addressed within a few weeks. The delay of over three months in resolving the request for accessible parking is excessive and fails to meet these standards. Timeline above illustrates LL failure to uphold agreed-upon lease terms and accommodate disability needs regarding accessible parking. Their actions have led to undue financial burden and threats of eviction, potentially violating both the FHA and state law. SanTan's conduct could be construed as harassment and discrimination, subjecting them to significant legal liability.

Action Needed from LL:

Immediate correction of billing errors, waiver of unauthorized fees, reinstatement of e-check payment ability, resolution of the accommodation request, and execution of the lease agreement. LL must address communication shortcomings and ensure compliance with the FHA and the Arizona Residential Landlord and Tenant Act to prevent further legal consequences, including potential lawsuits for discrimination, harassment, and breach of contract.Failure to comply to result in legal action seeking damages, including punitive damages, for the distress and financial losses incurred due to LL unlawful practices. We are prepared to pursue all available remedies under state and federal law to protect rights and ensure fair treatment.

Any advice, support, suggestions on the above much appreciated!

[mandana-the-service-pup]

Just made a “reasonable accommodation” request for our first rental house. The current door lock & handle are not very accessible for me but changing them is against our lease.

When everything is sorted out I’ll post the results & what was said for anyone else who may be facing a similar issue in the United States.

[deadpresidents]

You are an LBJ apologist

Here is a small selection of LBJ's legislative accomplishments during his five years and two months as President:

•Clean Air Act of 1963

•Food Stamp Act of 1964

•Civil Rights Act of 1964

•Creation of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1964)

•Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Creation of Head Start, Job Corps, and Community Action Programs)

•Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965

•Higher Education Act of 1965 (Creation of Teacher Corps and Upward Bound)

•National Endowment for the Arts

ªNational Endowment for the Humanities

ªImmigration and Nationality Act of 1965

•Social Security Amendments of 1965 (Creation of Medicare and Medicaid)

•Older Americans Act of 1965

•Creation of the Model Cities Program (1965)

•Child Nutrition Act of 1965 (Creation of school breakfast programs)

•Voting Rights Act of 1965

•Creation of VISTA (now part of AmeriCorps) (1965)

•Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (Creation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

•Fair Packaging and Labeling Act of 1966

•Child Safety Act of 1966

•Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 (Creation of PBS, NPR, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting)

•Wholesome Meat Act of 1967

•Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (Early disability access to public buildings law)

•Truth-In-Lending Act (1968)

•Gun Control Act of 1968

•Bilingual Education Act of 1968

•Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act, Indian Civil Rights Act, and creation of Federal hate crime laws)

•Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968

So, yeah, guilty as charged.

Here are more landmark laws from the LBJ years, courtesy of the fine folks over at the @lbjlibrary.

[whenweallvote]

Today marks 40 years since the passing of Clarence Maurice Mitchell Jr., a lifelong champion of equality for Black Americans. 

Serving as the NAACP's chief lobbyist for almost 30 years, Mitchell played a key role in passing the historic civil rights legislation of the 1960s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

We honor and thank him today for dedicating his life to the fight for equal rights. 🙏🏿

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear an appeal from a Christian college in Missouri that sued the Biden administration over its decision to shield transgender people from housing discrimination.

At issue was a 2021 memo from the Department of Housing and Urban Development that interpreted a federal anti-discrimination law as protecting transgender individuals. The College of the Ozarks claimed that the guidance conflicted with its ability to make housing assignments for students on the basis of sex assigned at birth.

"College of the Ozarks brought this challenge for one reason: The Biden administration was attempting to force them to open their dormitories to members of the opposite sex," said Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Julie Marie Blake. "Though the high court chose not to review this case, we are hopeful it will soon take up related cases....College of the Ozarks will continue to follow its beliefs."

Lower courts, including the St. Louis-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, sided with the Biden administration on a procedural point last year, finding that the college did not have standing to sue, in part, because the government never attempted to enforce an anti-discrimination complaint against the school.

The 2021 guidance, the Biden administration told the Supreme Court in its written response in late May, does not by itself require the school "or any other housing provider to do or refrain from doing anything." The college, the administration said, "has not alleged any past, current, or threatened enforcement."

The Biden administration's memo was the result of a significant 2020 Supreme Court decision that bars discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County focused on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which explicitly prohibits workplace discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex and religion. A majority of the court held that sexual orientation and gender identity necessarily involve a person's sex. Because of that, they reasoned, the law prohibits LGBTQ+ discrimination.

The anti-discrimination housing provision of the Fair Housing Act uses language that is similar to what's in the workplace law, including an explicit prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex.

[mermazeablaze]

We've been having issues with our landlady lately concerning our furbabies. Two of them are ESAs & there is a third one who (pitbull puppy) is an ESA in training to eventually replace one of the ESAs who is becoming elderly. Puppy is a month too young to have registered. We also had a cat that we weren't allowed to have but she knew we had, it was one of those silently mutual things between us. It wasn't until she saw the puppy it became a problem. She doesn't care about the legitimate reason for the puppy. She stated point blank that she doesn't like pitbulls & they aren't allowed on the property. She even said dobermans & other "fighting dogs" are fine. We fucked her off because we know our legal rights in Oklahoma concerning ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) & FHA (Fair Housing Act). So she sent a letter a week ago stating she's coming by today to inspect our apartment & the cat & puppy better be gone. Even though other neighbors have multiple pets beyond the pet limit & the landlady knows. But one super sweet bully & all bets are off. We intend to move when our lease is up at the end of February, we're just waiting on funds & can't afford to be homeless. So we sent our cat to stay with my dad until we move & we sent the puppy to a dogsitter for a week. Now one of our ESA dogs is experiencing depression at the temporary loss of the cat & puppy. All of us are profoundly sad & angry at the situation. Hekate has been speaking to me during this time, 'Unwelcome visitors are trespassers'. I went to get incense from under our altar to burn & felt an electric shock & heard her say, 'Prominently display us (her & the triple goddess) today.' Because the landlady is doing her inspection today. So I did. Hekate has also been nudging me to use a witch bottle I've been saving as a binding tool against the landlady to mind her business. & bury it next to her office door. I just might if I can do it without being caught.

[coggnoo]

Fair Housing (California)

This course provides an introduction to the Fair Housing Act, California State fair housing laws, and other laws affecting fair housing and anti-discrimination. The course includes violation examples and strategies to create a welcoming, enjoyable, and inclusive residential community for everyone.

The course is intended for residential property managers and staff members who need to understand Fair Housing laws and best practices; but who do not require Continuing Education credit.

Certificate of completion and closed captioning included.

[mariluphoto]

Traducción en español:

Un miembro judío de la sinagoga Keter Torá dio una noticia impactante:

Israel está organizando una venta de bienes raíces el 10 de marzo dentro de la sinagoga de Nueva Jersey para vender asentamientos en Palestina.

Contra la Ley de Vivienda Justa, la Ley de Derechos Civiles y varias leyes internacionales, un gobierno extranjero está organizando un evento solo para blancos, mientras comete un genocidio contra los no blancos.

Gracias a Dios por el valiente judío que se presentó.

Prometió organizar una protesta si no se cancela el evento.

via. IG: ceolawyer

[hislop3]

Senior Living/CCRC Risk Reduction and the Fair Housing Act

On Friday, I wrote about expanding litigation due to increasing resident care needs found in senior living, assisted and independent living. Specifically, the issue is primarily around “acuity creep” or residents aging in-place, in environments that may not have the staff and infrastructure to meet their advancing care needs. Friday’s post is here:…

[rialewrites]

calling all lawyers on tumblr versed in the Fair Housing Act as it applies to Colorado: it looks like pet rent should not be charged for ESAs. when a landlord has done so without communication with the tenant, what sentence should i say (e.g. according to this document in this specific place, don't do that), or what document should i print out, highlight, and shove in their face? alternatively, where can i find this information myself in the future?

additionally, if a college rejects an ESA, with the correct paperwork, from living in the dorms with their person, is this covered under the Fair Housing Act?

[mfi-miami]

Widespread Housing Discrimination Persists In The USA

Widespread Housing Discrimination Persists Against Minorities And The LGBTQ+ Community Despite Ever Expanding Federal Laws Widespread housing discrimination persists among ethnic minorities and the LGBTQ+ community. This is despite the federal government expanding on the Federal Housing Act passed over 50 years ago. Roughly 32% of people of African descent say they felt they faced…

[mandana-the-service-pup]

I was a little apprehensive about the application process for the rental home and how they would handle the service dog situation. Some of you may remember what we had to go through with our current apartment complex. It was a lot of rude emails on their part but eventually they got their lawyers involved and realized we were correct. They had to change their policies but it was a lot of stress & effort for a disabled person to have to go through while sick.

Fortunately, the leasing company that runs this house is doing it right. They use a third-party company called petscreening.com for all of their applicants and there is special consideration for service animals. It’s was very thorough but also easy to complete and in my opinion probably one of the best ways to filter out fake service dogs without inconveniencing real disabled people.

I obviously can’t show all of our info but here are some screen shots. This shows what the application process looks like after it’s submitted but while filling out each section it walks you through the steps and explains your legal rights for various parts and how that would apply to service animals. The application is then sent to a team of legal consultants for review. It was very user friendly & free for me to use. I hope other leasing companies & landlords will adopt this service instead of pressuring their disabled tenants with inappropriate requests.

[nando161mando]

Remember how white nationalists came after the teaching of Black History and Drag story hours? Now they're coming after Fair Housing.

Read the latest from @irehr,

[lordrakim]

Asian American advocates slam DeSantis for land law that they say 'will legalize Asian hate'

“People will have a reason — legally they have a law backing them up — to hate,” one critic said. Continue reading Untitled

[petervintonjr]

"I've never tried to run away from my race. I was born a black man. You know that in your bones as soon as you are able to understand this country."

Today we look at the remarkable career trajectory of Edward Brooke, III, Massachusetts attorney general and two-term U.S. Senator (1967-1979). Born in 1919 Washington, D.C., Brooke was himself the son of a Howard University law school alum and Veterans' Administration attorney. Following in his father's footsteps when he graduated Howard in 1941, Brooke then joined the U.S. Army during World War II (serving in the famed all-Black 366th Combat Infantry), seeing action in Italy and ultimately earning a Bronze Star. After the war Brooke earned his law degree from Boston University Law School, but initially showed no interest in a political career --in fact he never deigned to vote until the age of 30.

Confounding much of the prevailing wisdom of the day, Brooke entered politics as a Republican --campaigning for various Massachusetts state-level legislative offices throughout the 1950s but to no success. Then in 1960 he ran for Massachusetts Secretary of State state's Attorney General --significantly the first-ever Black nomination for a statewide office in Massachusetts' history. Though he also lost that election (narrowly), two years later he made a successful run for state's Attorney General, becoming the first elected Black Attorney General of any state. During his time in office he gained some notoriety as a key coordinator of the prosecution of the infamous "Boston Strangler," Albert DeSalvo. In 1966 he ran for U.S. Senate as a Republican, defeating the incumbent and again making history by becoming the first African-American to ever be elected to the Senate by direct popular vote. (See Lesson #24 in this series for some context, in the biography of Blanche Kelso Bruce.) In 1972 Brooke was re-elected, acquiring another historical footnote as the first-ever African-American senator to win a second term.

Chided by some as being "too black to be white" and by others as "too white to be black," Brooke figured out how to walk a uniquely independent line, at times even declining to participate in conversations on race. Among Brooke's most significant accomplishments in the Senate included his co-authorship of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act --also known as the Fair Housing Act of 1968, enacted one week after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Brooke also led successful challenges against not one but two of Richard Nixon's Supreme Court nominees based on their stated views on segregation. Also noteworthy is Brooke being on record as the first Republican Senator to publicly call for Nixon's resignation in November 1973. After leaving office Brooke returned to Washington, D.C. to continue to practice law. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2004, and awarded the Congressional Gold Medal in 2009.

"The polarization of Congress; the decline of civility; and the rise of attack politics in the 1980s, the 1990s, and the early years of the new century are a blot on our political system and a disservice to the American people."