Disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. Kennedy writes the Majority.
Justice Thomas dissents, as does Alito (joined by Chief Roberts and Scalia)
So the Court holds that there is a disparate impact claim under the FHA as a matter of statutory interpretation, but it the Court cautions that remedial orders in disparate impact cases that impose racial targets or quotas could be unconstitutional.
The Court emphasizes, however, that disparate impact liability should be impose cautiously. To avoid constitutional problems, statistical disparity is not enough.