IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
2922 SHERMAN AVENUE TENANTS'
ASSOCIATION et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Civil Action No. 1:00CV00862
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________________
BRIEF OF THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE
IN OPPOSITION TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S MOTION TO DISMISS
I. Introduction
The United States submits this brief as amicus curiae in support of
Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. In this
case, Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that the District of Columbia
("the District") has engaged in selective and discriminatory
enforcement of its housing code on the basis of national origin in
violation of the Fair Housing Act. 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq. ("the
Act"). The District has moved to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6),
Fed. R. Civ. P., or, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
This brief addresses two arguments raised by the District: 1) that
the Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim against the District
under the Act; and 2) that the Plaintiffs, as tenants' associations
formed for the sole purpose of bringing this lawsuit, lack standing
to sue the District of Columbia pursuant to the Act. None of the
arguments advanced by the District has merit.
As we set forth in greater detail below, the overwhelming weight of
judicial authority supports the Plaintiffs' claims against the
District that its allegedly discriminatory and selective housing
code enforcement practices have made housing unavailable under
Section 3604(a) of the Act. 42 U.S.C. §3604(a). The Plaintiffs'
claims against the District for discriminatory terms, conditions,
privileges, or provision of services are equally sustainable
against the District under Section 3604(b) of the Act. 42 U.S.C.
§3604(b). The cases cited by the District do not support its
arguments. Additionally, the District's arguments regarding the
Plaintiffs' standing are similarly unsupported by legal precedent
SNIPPETS:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRIEF OF THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE IN OPPOSITION TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S
The United States submits this brief as amicus curiae in support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to
In this case, Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that the District of Columbia has engaged in
This brief addresses two arguments raised by the District: 1) that the Plaintiffs have failed
Included in the list, but not noticed for closure at the time of Complaint, was 1611 Park
In ruling on a motion to dismiss, courts must accept as true all material allegations of the
It is well-established that a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim
First, the District has failed to identify, let alone address, the weight of authority
In Arlington Heights, the seminal case providing for municipality liability, the 7^th Circuit
The defendants in Wai, like the District here, relied on Clifton II in support of its Motion
The Supreme Court has stated that, "here is no question that an association may have standing
the Village municipality - a non individual - was held to have standing to bring a Fair
The District appears to confuse the injuries outlined in Havens, by a fair housing
Because there has been no discovery in this case and the District's Statement of Undisputed
|
