IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 66 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the obligation 

of the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education and 

the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice to enforce title 

VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its implementing regulations, 

and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding 

the obligation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 

to ‘‘build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 22, 2019 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia (for himself and Mr. NADLER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and 

in addition to the Committee on Education and Labor, for a period to 

be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the obligation of the Office for Civil Rights of the 

Department of Education and the Civil Rights Division 

of the Department of Justice to enforce title VI of the 

Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its implementing regulations, and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the obligation of the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development to ‘‘build inclusive 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 66 IH 

and sustainable communities free from discrimination’’, 

and for other purposes. 

Whereas, 64 years ago, in the case of Brown v. Board of 

Education of Topeka, Kansas, a unanimous Supreme 

Court held that segregated school systems based on race 

are inherently unequal and violate the 14th Amendment 

to the Constitution; 

Whereas Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in 

part, to address ‘‘Massive Resistance’’, a collection of 

State laws passed in response to the Brown decision that 

aggressively tried to forestall and prevent school integration, and the ‘‘Declaration of Constitutional Principles’’ 

(known colloquially as the ‘‘Southern Manifesto’’) signed 

on March 12, 1956, by Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, that attacked the decision 

and opposed integrated schools; 

Whereas title VI of that law prohibits programs and activities 

that receive Federal funds from discriminating based on 

race, color, or national origin; 

Whereas former President John F. Kennedy eloquently explained the need for title VI by stating that ‘‘[s]imple 

justice requires that public funds, to which all taxpayers 

of all races contribute, not be spent in any fashion which 

encourages, entrenches, subsidizes, or results in racial 

discrimination. Direct discrimination by Federal, State, 

or local governments is prohibited by the Constitution. 

But, indirect discrimination, through the use of Federal 

funds, is just as invidious; and it should not be necessary 

to resort to the courts to prevent each individual violation.’’; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 66 IH 

Whereas title VI requires policies and practices to be developed and administered in a manner that does not intentionally discriminate against students on the basis of 

race, color, or national origin, and that does not ‘‘have 

the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin, or . . . of 

defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of 

the objectives of the program as respects individuals of 

a particular race, color, or national origin.’’; 

Whereas racial discrimination in the public school systems 

nationwide continues to persist, as exemplified by— 

(1) a recent appellate court decision holding that a 

White community’s attempt to secede from a majority 

Black Alabama school district was racially discriminatory 

in violation of the Constitution; and 

(2) a recent Department of Education Office for 

Civil Rights resolution of a complaint filed against Durham Public Schools in North Carolina regarding discrimination against Black students and students with disabilities in the application of school discipline requiring Durham Public Schools to take actions to end discriminatory 

discipline practices; 

Whereas recent reports by the Government Accountability Office and other national education advocacy organizations 

detail racial disparities in the Nation’s education systems, 

including that— 

(1) the percentage of schools that are isolated by 

poverty and race increased from 9 percent during the 

2000–2001 school year to 16 percent during the 2013– 

2014 school year; 

(2) high-poverty schools that are majority Black and 

Latino are less likely to offer a range of math courses, 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
4 

•HRES 66 IH 

and such lack of access is linked to lower completion 

rates for higher level math and science courses in high 

school, which are critical components of preparing students for college and careers; 

(3) only 12 percent of students took Advanced 

Placement courses at high-poverty schools that are majority Black and Latino and offer such courses, compared 

to 24 percent of all students in low-poverty schools with 

lower Black and Latino enrollment; 

(4) students of color on average have lower enrollment in prekindergarten programs, and attend lower 

quality prekindergarten programs, than their White 

peers; 

(5) Black students are disproportionately excluded 

from school, beginning as early as preschool, and students who are suspended are more likely to fail a grade, 

drop out of school, and become involved in the juvenile 

justice system; 

(6) with few exceptions, Black students, boys, and 

students with disabilities experience disparities in the administration of school discipline, regardless of the type of 

disciplinary action, poverty level of the school, or type of 

public school attended; and 

(7) research suggests that implicit biases—stereotypes or unconscious associations that people, including 

teachers and other school staff, hold about other people— 

are a contributing factor to these discipline disparities because they cause school staff to judge students differently 

based on their race; 

Whereas disparate impact analysis is an essential tool to combat discrimination across other areas of the Civil Rights 

Act of 1964; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
5 

•HRES 66 IH 

Whereas the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has acknowledged that the disproportionate placement of industrial polluters in low-income and minority neighborhoods 

in Flint, Michigan, is discriminatory, and whereas the entirety of the environmental justice movement is premised 

on a disparate impact analysis; 

Whereas Federal appellate courts have determined that violations of title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, also 

known as the Fair Housing Act (FHA), may be established through the disparate impact theory of liability; 

Whereas, in Texas Department of Housing and Community 

Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, the Supreme 

Court held that disparate impact claims are cognizable 

under the FHA, with Justice Kennedy writing, ‘‘Recognition of disparate-impact claims is also consistent with the 

central purpose of the FHA, which, like Title VII and the 

ADEA, was enacted to eradicate discriminatory practices 

within a sector of the Nation’s economy. Suits targeting 

unlawful zoning laws and other housing restrictions that 

unfairly exclude minorities from certain neighborhoods 

without sufficient justification are at the heartland of disparate-impact liability. . . . Recognition of disparate-impact liability under the FHA plays an important role in 

uncovering discriminatory intent: it permits plaintiffs to 

counteract unconscious prejudices and disguised animus 

that escape easy classification as disparate treatment.’’; 

Whereas the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of 

Education and the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice are charged with enforcing title VI and 

its regulations, which prohibit both intentional discrimination and unintentional discrimination resulting from 

policies and practices that have a discriminatory effect, 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
6 

•HRES 66 IH 

or disparate impact, on students based on race, color, or 

national origin; 

Whereas racial discrimination cases decided under title VIII 

of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and title VII of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964 provide guidance on how to analyze 

intentional discrimination and unintentional discrimination based upon disparate impact claims brought under 

title VI; 

Whereas the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is 

charged with administration of the FHA, and has promulgated rules to clarify the application of disparate impact to FHA cases; 

Whereas the EPA’s External Civil Rights Compliance Office 

(ECRCO) (formerly Office of Civil Rights (OCR)), within 

the Office of General Counsel, is charged with enforcing 

civil rights under title VI and since 1973 has prohibited 

recipients of EPA financial assistance from taking actions in their programs or activities that are intentionally 

discriminatory and/or have a discriminatory effect; 

Whereas the Department of Transportation’s Office of Civil 

Rights is responsible for ensuring that recipients of Federal funds from that agency conduct their federally assisted programs and activities in a nondiscriminatory 

manner in compliance with title VI; 

Whereas the Office for Civil Rights for the Office of Justice 

Programs (OJP) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) ensures that recipients of financial assistance from OJP 

comply with Federal antidiscrimination laws, including 

title VI; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
7 

•HRES 66 IH 

Whereas a DOJ memo was recently leaked to the Washington 

Post in which senior Civil Rights Division officials were 

directed ‘‘to examine how decades-old ‘disparate impact’ 

regulations might be changed or removed . . . and what 

the impact might be’’; 

Whereas the Washington Post reports that similar directives 

to eliminate regulations using disparate impact analysis 

are being considered at the Department of Education and 

are already underway at the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development; 

Whereas Federal agencies under both Democratic and Republican administrations have a history of bringing title VI 

disparate impact claims; and 

Whereas the Supreme Court’s decision in Alexander v. 

Sandoval overturned four decades of statutory protections 

against discrimination by eliminating an implied private 

right of action under title VI to challenge disparate impact, leaving Federal agencies as the only entities that 

can bring disparate impact claims: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) reaffirms that the original intent of the 

3 Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to broadly prohibit all 

4 forms of discrimination by providing for both the 

5 Federal Government and private attorneys general 

6 to bring cases under causes of action to enforce 

7 against both disparate treatment and disparate im8 pact; 

9 (2) reaffirms its commitment to ensuring that 

10 the elementary, secondary, and college educational 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
8 

•HRES 66 IH 

1 systems of the United States prepare all students for 

2 successful careers, regardless of their race, color, or 

3 national origin; 

4 (3) reaffirms its commitment to ensuring that 

5 all communities are inclusive, sustainable, and free 

6 from discrimination; 

7 (4) recognizes that the Office for Civil Rights 

8 of the Department of Education, the Civil Rights 

9 Division and Office of Justice Programs of the De10 partment of Justice, the Department of Housing 

11 and Urban Development, the Environmental Protec12 tion Agency, and other Federal agencies have an ob13 ligation to enforce title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 

14 1964 and its implementing regulations; 

15 (5) expects the Department of Education, the 

16 Department of Justice, and other Federal agencies 

17 to enforce title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 

18 and its implementing regulations, as they have done 

19 in the past under Democratic and Republican ad20 ministrations, using all legal theories including dis21 parate treatment and disparate impact, given the 

22 growing evidence that racial discrimination in edu23 cation, housing, and other aspects of public life con24 tinue to adversely impact individuals and commu25 nities; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
9 

•HRES 66 IH 

1 (6) will hold oversight hearings to ensure that 

2 the Department of Education, the Department of 

3 Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban De4 velopment, the Environmental Protection Agency, 

5 and other Federal agencies enforce title VI of the 

6 Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its implementing regu7 lations, including enforcement with respect to unin8 tentional discrimination resulting from policies and 

9 practices that have a discriminatory effect, or dis10 parate impact, on individuals and communities based 

11 on race, color, or national origin; and 

12 (7) will consider legislation that acknowledges 

13 and reaffirms the original intent of the Civil Rights 

14 Act of 1964 and the original intent to prohibit all 

15 forms of discrimination and discriminatory effects, 

16 including H.R. 2486 (115th Congress), the Equity 

17 and Inclusion Enforcement Act, a bill that restores 

18 the title VI private right of action in cases involving 

19 disparate impact, creates title VI monitors to ensure 

20 that every school has at least one employee respon21 sible for investigating any complaints of discrimina22 tion based on race, color, or national origin, and cre23 ates a position of Assistant Secretary in the DepartVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:24 Jan 23, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR66.IH HR66

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
10 

•HRES 66 IH 

1 ment of Education to coordinate and promote title 

2 VI enforcement of equity and inclusion in education. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS