Court Opinion

ID: 9472062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 03:48:26.432223+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:42:43.598081
License: Public Domain

GEORGE CLIFTON EDWARDS, Jr., Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I think the majority’s opinion fairly states the issues in this case and I concur in their result, with the exception of the failure to meet appellant’s request for information which would serve to prove or disprove whether or not the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program was being manipulated to promote housing segregation. Specifically I agree with my colleagues that the names of individual veterans and their addresses would tend to invade personal privacy of veterans taking advantage of the program.
What I do not understand is the reluctance of the agency to release information pertaining to lenders and amounts of mortgage loans and to furnish numbers and amounts of such loans in at least a reasonable number of particular blocks which appellants might designate. The Supreme Court has pointed out “that Congress considered [fair housing] to be of the highest priority” in Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 409 U.S. 205, 211, 93 S.Ct. 364, 367, 34 L.Ed.2d 415 (1972).
I would remand this case with instructions to the Veterans Administration to cooperate with plaintiff in devising the reasonable spot check procedure just referred to.