City of miami. Mr. Chief justice the question is if whether the city can sue under one of the most important laws of the Fair Housing Act the question the answer is yes are sometimes. That would eviscerate g. O. P. Doctrines of the court of proximate cause but it cannot be never because the city can identify it its own interest such as expenditures to combat the racial misconduct in third the lawsuit looks out proximate cause because the injury that it seeks to remedy is unrelated and several steps removed from any alleged acts of petitioner. Could do legally do that . So please tell us. But under this scenario so can you tell us under what circumstances could act suit . Justice ginsberg of existing law identify is one is like a haven situation is combating it discrimination so to take those allegations and make them to be out the discriminatory loans and had to expend the funds that was very much like the of onetoone relationship and by proximate cause. But they were not city employees. That was a private organization employees whose job it was so why are you attributing to the testers work . In that paragraph of the complaint that asks for the citys expenditures to combat specific things. Why is this different than the other allegations or those that lost tax base with increased monitoring of the area of police and services with the city expenditures. With respect to do think that is gladstone but our position is if this goes back to Justice Ginsburg questioned a subcabinet is that there is a segregation claim that they were staring africanamericans out so that is the antidiscrimination arm so for those it does not talk about proximate cause but. Im sorry so you think that banks are forcing about of the neighborhood is not discrimination . I say to that extent absolutely it is a that is what gladstone recognizes it doesnt recognize Something Like this complete the rather they are borrowing somebody elses discrimination with those discriminatory loan so that is that the victims could be sued for that but that is what congress empowered them to do or downstream by those tax revenues that concerns the porch to have that antidiscrimination to cut and paste. That they were not suing for those Property Values with a loss of revenue. So that it was depleted. I dont think that is totally correct but in the gladstone the injury itself to a the village was the antidiscrimination. That is on page one ted of the opinion is that has not been identified to the city of miami that is why this case is not within that zone of interest fake of it this way one is the thompson shareholder with that Economic Injury with the underlying act of discrimination like the ceo who was fired for race discrimination so that that opens the door. But if that is the case that is of standing. Absolutely. And then to reduce that language in the opinion itself but the open again talks about bad decision about the landlords. So with that interpretation in your opening that door to anyone else who can borrow somebody elses antidiscrimination. Is your offer for relation. Is the city in position as then the habeas case . But in the first bucket that they are identifying specific concrete interest so to the extent the city bonds to do that that is fine and there is a second category. So you say this city is limited for the damages for what they can recover . P. S. Is that the cost to pay a her . Just as it is with the ngo i know you are troubled by that the second is the gladstones segregation category it in that instance the city can recover with proximate cause but they can recover for the of harm of the integrated neighborhood become segregated. That is something they can recover for this. Is that the police force . No. With those proximate cause problems down the road there are those of causalities could this city recover of general damages to have a more segregated community as a result of the defendants actions . That could be very hard to identify that is why the scheme that congress had implied was to the Justice Department and to hide it to bring these cases. But that is part of your main argument of the city can recover for having a more segregated environment to be measured by all sorts of things then how do you measure the damages if the harvest simply having a more segregated city . To rec i am making the argument of what is required that the city has to identify his injury and has to identify the antidiscrimination interests they have suffered. So to that extent love of the addition of the tax base that is not the antidiscrimination injury. But that suggests the way Congress Passed the fha it was all the individual acts of discrimination. Bagdad is a peculiar and distinctive kind of antidiscrimination statutes that is focusing on community and we talked about this so it isnt just individuals but communities that our harmful and that is the basis of the idea of the entire statute. So every time you do this redline a community is inflated so then what better the of the city to recognize and asserts that. The way congress dealt with at to have that patriarch standing and also Justice Justice kagan with the state and local enforcement to deal with those types of Community Center problems youre talking about. So they say we are a person aggrieved baggage is enforcement by private persons. They are aggrieved as a person because they say as you do this refers read the wide redline what makes us a city is more blighted and that is so were trying to recover for is the cost of responding to that to not have revenues to carry out our services. This is our own interest to maintain communities free of the Racial Discrimination that causes neighborhood blight. Of the complaint were written to say about segregation causing slight we would have no problem than the city would fall within the zone of interest. So that light is caused and falling for segregation in. Bandwidth thats hypophysis. I dont think that it matters to the extent and is fitted its downstream. Guess i dont understand why it isnt segregation the city says you have done the of redlining or the reverse redline that is very is foreclosures over the city and it concentrated areas and it is doing that because of racial segregation at the same time it is preventing that racial segregation from ever being lifted because they are more and more blighted and less capable of becoming integrated communities so everything about this complaint is racial segregation. Look at what you said that read data against their complaint because the of that is in the complaint. So you think of it was written like that they could maintain the suit . They could for segregation in demand those of what they are seeking is the recovery of the foreclosure crisis in miami with billions of dollars nationwide and that delta between the segregated community and the analysis. And that is integrated community. How do you measure that . I am not sure. So talking about that is what gladstone dealt with the of with respect to these yoda pinterest that complaint that Justice Kagan read would satisfy is of interest to allow the cities to get a jump to of relief with that concept that you were talking about so with us beverages to said definition of the tax base . So to talk about that definition and tax revenues so i dont take the court has decided whether or not to they allow a segregation lawsuit. That was the of proximate cause . There are so many steps involved if you look that the solicitor general all the steps required before the city to have discriminatory loans the default access to the to foreclosures the increase is in vacancies lead to reduction of Property Value. I also think of proximate cause as day question of liability but not damages. But you said liability and damages . I do the court has thought about it that way as a benchmark. Sova get those underlying damages as a threat. So with that standard proximate cause as principal. And then to of all that long chain of causation with that billions of dollars. But could i ask a separate question talking about that so and of interest so you have these three cases prior to the 88 reenactment of the old 68 wang graded each of these cases with gladstone and others say very specifically say so that stretches to interest of article three amending that statute against the backdrop so why should we understand that it stretches to the limits of article three . Of first Justice Kagan is the al holdings of the court so the court was unanimous actually i was anticipating the reverse. [laughter] but i think the court to went through this at the time that this was the of binding holders. We can argue with faber holdings of their arguments on both sides but its if you were the adviser to a congressman and who said i dont like this idea i take we should limit that. Sold used that same language . It has been consistently understood under the limits of article iii a and you say dont worry. And he says i feel relieved now we can use this link which her probe would he be fired . [laughter] but i think it is not just follow what is required but that is the express of the interest of that implicit doctor in with that doctor and is only guided to what congress implicitly thought without bloch case. And even before that the court says that you need a express vacation by congress. But they lessdeveloped because it is understood over what it had been before. In that is to facilitate so that blocked before 1988 and then do it also would be fired in the hypothetical that that house report says there are only two things that they have the judicial standing applies to the same standard. I dont view it that way but that does refer to those particular aspects but it seems to cut tickets to because it makes clear that congress do about those cases that are of course, those cases that say with those article three of a cabal legislative history is clear that it took off the shelf that was discussed in 1980 and there was a law of discussion whether the standing should go to live its of article three and congress was thinking of changing the language in the assistant attorney general and the hud secretary said if you change that language it is a problem because then you cut back on standing so congress decided not to because it wanted to go to the limits of article iii. Justice kagan even if all that is true with dad express vacation for the reason that. This is not expressed limitation that means we are doing away or keeping this. So that is the explicit statement the of that endangered species statute that any person meant in any person and did away with this soda ventris of year we have a congress of 1988 from title xii and many other statutes and it took the definition looked at by prior regulations to be examined by the court with that article three standing that is very different from the normal definition. It is not very different that is a plain jane definition but what you were talking about the endangered species act that is their interpretation so for the first time there is no damages statute that allows anybody to use do of their interpretations of now proximate cause is that there is a general rule in independent market that says liability is cut off. If you adopt this theory you are excepting that liability in the way the court has never done before. And then you could expand a little bit beyond that first step of that one one relationship but damages for that foreclosure crisis is something way beyond this court. Candy say to those completes that i wrote is also the proximate cause principles . That would have to satisfy the requirement so that segregation would harm directly if they lose diversity so with their relationship every day of the week so to abrogate that traditional proximate cause but here it was the plain jane version of damages and with creative complaint and only through a couple of years ago have we ever seen the complaint hear they are seeking to recover for the foreclosure crisis that couldnt satisfy proximate cause is principles all the way to the wolves opinion of this court the holmes a opinion. Of reading the briefs i was confused of proximate cause because that is about for c ability. There are places where we said this is the additional requirement but only in discrete areas. So i come back to the notion they think it suggests it is a statute of the statute whether it is a force the ability inquiry or the other components. I will reserve the balance of my time but the proximate cause is the basic requirement of a direct relationship between the incurious conduct and the injured and. That is the general rule. So what do we do with the of little significance between direct and indirect injuries for purposes of filing suit under the fha. The proponents of the legislation those that were not the direct object of discrimination have an interest. Justice sotomayor i agree with all of that. So the difference between direct and indirect as a meeting in the statute. You have never said anything of proximate cause that is a completely different inquiry. Mr. Chief justice of it may please the court, the city of miami is seeking injunctive relief in terms of damages because of the banks practice providing minority borrowers with the riskier loans than they qualified for and more than the minority borrowers received. With these efforts are in fair housing and intended this city to cause those benefits with the opportunity that comes with the integrated community. So if the complaint makes that out to have standing we thought the original complaint the 11th circuit agreed with us. But to dismiss us with prejudice of the original complaint to make it more explicit and as a result to have the opportunity to do that. But it does talk about the fact the city operates of Economic Development with the councils that educate and is in charge of all kinds of efforts of the original complaint. At the same time we recognize it comes from what is embodied in the Fair Housing Act. In that it would be if they know would exist if they have the complaint. I am looking at the joint appendix, your opening paragraph where you see it has harmed the residents of miami with eight active commitment to their residential integrated patterns and to create a Stable Community but then you go on to the specific damages so it is those types of allegations. Cry point to those on to 32 that describe the operation of the Economic Development. This is like gladstone. As a result we think regardless if you take the article three approach standing or a more narrow formulation that we are tied to the violations and i dont understand either bank as long as we make those pleadings that we would be prevented. Do you think your direct victim of discrimination because of the damages that you seek will not be paid to the direct victims of discrimination . We are a direct victim under the Fair Housing Act and with those damages better it issue that are indirectly harm also harmed. If your injuries are derivative to the homeowners of the sub prime mortgages i a understand down the line but i do understand as a direct injury that is the integrated community that they have found. Where is the limit to that . Bayous suffer the loss of sales tax and it is less attractive so you use those tourist revenues you could not cover up those losses . We do not think that we can. We know that is not as attractive to go somewhere else. But to be in the unique position there our zoning laws. The Property Values or taxes are baked into the homeowners that are part of the big part in a parcel of the issue. Said to have that affirmative obligation so miami among other cities give block grants from hud. See you articulated in that sentence. You do get property taxes we believe it has to tie specifically to the property how was the cost of increased services . But the department has to look for those of unsafe structures after foreclosure but they have to read mediate so this is the other end to the fair housing and to make that whole again. But with gladstone the court recognized a municipality is directly injured with the taxes that have been forgone so that is the direct connection. So that they just decided . The court did not but it is hard to read that sentence to see anything but proximate cause. Minister of the discriminatory conduct. And what my friend also said that in the complaint we mention we have lost millions on property taxes. Before the city of miami brought its case they ended up settling cases with those allegations but we are not talking about huge sums of money factored into the settlement but if you prevailed dont have to give that up as the possibility so at that point to believe that it is a separate issue and then to go to the zone of interest so with the survival of that. Would go back to that chief position that was started read for that force the ability . Less of a law of other things they were suggesting theyre not recoverable. Because they are not foreseeable or measurable . Darr difficult to measure. That is of the superseding the event. You want us to use the phrase proximate cause is to determine how far those damages and . But with lexmark for example,. Where do i turn . So the guidance of that case was still images of what the conduct prohibits what we have done is part make a proposal. But that is decreasing the property tax values. But it does prohibit the discrimination of housing of these kinds of loans so we try to take those damages to the specific properties and what generates directly to the city. Proximate causes between the alleged misconduct and that what seeks to protect against so my friend does not disagree they are protected and certainly with gladstone this is what the court has recognized. So what is appropriate damages . Damages that are tightly connected to the actual injury. So do we have to decide the damages are appropriate . What the 11th circuit noted is that any time in between what was written and when they argued the case console in that decision they mentioned there was a proximate cause standard to be incorporated. So we will not delve into what that is exactly and the District Court for that decision but that could play out in the further litigation of a lawsuit. So do we include language that is based on the of experience . [laughter] as the opponents have indicated that this is the 2008 to financial crisis and it needed a response. So with respect to the financial crisis during that 2008 period if that was the purpose of the lawsuit the the statute of limitations would have entered this a long time ago but instead will be found and what was acknowledged what was set off with the kinds of loans that have taken different forms but the underlying practice remains the same that it is more expensive with riskier loans and seven times the of frequency. So the difference between the predatory london this of prime loans that is a generic term to take advantage of a bar were. Bedded is a wonderful deal until you look at those balloon payments cpac are also of prime loans categorized as predatory . I do believe they are. If you have a business that is losing money and employees because it is deteriorating to they have a stronger or weaker claim that they lost product from the business because it was debilitated . They have a weaker claim. They are property owners. They are. And there is no damage to their personal property but if i could step back with the endangered species act to recognize article iii qualifies the endangered species act but it is a claim based on interest you cannot make the claim based on discrimination that there is some generalized interest with that cause of action said to have a special interest of fair housing that the fha is designed to vindicate so that a local dry cleaner does not so they have a unique relationship to their neighborhoods and communities and they decide how the property is supposed to be used in the use those services. Does the Business Owner have an interest with the integrated vibrant neighborhood just as the city would to have that preserved in the city . They do have that interest but it is very difficult to look at those damages that you claim. What is the difference between fha and title seven we allow our neighbors or nonprofit organizations and developers and realestate to vindicate that interest or to have that coworker with the colleagues. And to be within that type of action. So in the end there are direct injuries to the city in the effort to secure housing and those are recoverable and that satisfies any type of proximate cause as well as the interest in the integrated community that allows those business and opportunities to flow. But the court recognizes and the gladstone case what is appropriate of those damages in such the instance that frankly are part and parcel so were not asking for anything that is different away from what the process is but in the end with just the city of miami that the injuries are so far afield that they are outside the zone of interest would never applies and there is a reason for that because that is of the discrimination that was propounded. So that has to flow there was a violation of the act so even if it was to be exempt so to take up that discriminatory loan. To be into foreclosure and then he can still bring the lawsuits with all those different steps with the financial status of the economy with the job situation or the family situation to realize those images are proximate cause. So i suggest to align with the 11th circuit. Mr. Chief justice and it may please the court if it is territory housing practices cause a reduction in property volumes and congress codify that result with the Fair Housing Act and that is still recognizable today whether under the rationale for under that zone of interest russian also those poinsettia 40 come up today to say you cannot cut and paste injury from a victim to another that is an argument that gladstone has rejected so what matters here is the brunt of the trilogy that they decided between 72 and 82 that somebody had their legal rights violated it doesnt necessarily have to be injured by that violation but that is what we think is the work done by negative a typical position. That is a very broad statement so then what about the restaurant or the dry cleaner for somebody elses discrimination. I think that comes from that cause analysis we dont disagree but here we think although gladstone did not been addressed proximate cause but the city is directly injured by the decrease of Property Values so that all to the test and is repeatedly recognized it is a statute by statute major the ultimate test if there is a close connection with the statute prohibits is a discriminatory housing practice. You could have the dry cleaner with the successes of integration. So we could be absolutely clear. Do they all have suits . They have not argued that to the extent they can get themselves into the home or the specific costs associated. You her a the question that if we did those in alaska of integration will be wrecked because they dont have that. That is absolutely clear of a causal connection. We do think that is further afield. But that is not of causation. That we prove that it is caused. For proximate cause is about determining even causes is too far away with the intervening cause or Something Else so by definition that carves out otherwise it would not do anything different under article three so here we think the white is is connected is it prohibits discriminatory house practices that include those terms and conditions of property or realestate related transactions were those specifically prohibited that somebody would go into a neighborhood and say there are minorities so that condon cad and effect. Of the corner grocer or the gardener every week and then they let down there guard but we will assume that possibility so if the city has standing and those injuries are approximately colonist . Caused . Billing that we see is to the Property Value so this is a question of congressional intent this court had already recognized it was directly injured by a property so those that have those Property Values diminished but the corner store to the extent it does have that is to one of the neighbors in the talks about lost profits those are further afield in not so closely connected. But the Utility Company is further field . No. What the court recognized is the of Property Value is closely tied to the practices. So what about those realestate brokers . Yes as we discuss those the type of people that have an interest in the transaction even if just economic interest to be disputing that if it fails to go through because of this then we think it is important. But they say but they will be lower across the board . That is different from the corner grocers store . That could be harder for them to establish from those cases from those Real Estate Agents and what was caused by the discriminatory housing practices it is important for the court to recall for those that dont necessarily have that quote unquote desegregation interest that is part of their economic interest and as the court pointed out and it is not require that day at on like the nonprofit in addition. So to those that were limited that was contemplated by the statute and the value of the property . And the changes of Property Value and also when 1988 when the courts have already enumerated that particular issue. In your position is that it affects the community as a whole and the community has an interest in assuring the stability of the communities, not that the city could enforce particular instances of this discrimination. I think its both. I think that the community representing interest. But also to the extent that they can say we suffer harm from this particular transaction lets assume its one complex or something. One particular home. I suspect thats where there would be that much the city bringing the suit much less the owner. In the city bring that action . Yes, to the extent they can say theres a onetoone relationship. Theyre just like the microchip manufacture. Whenever theres a decline in Property Value on the part of the primary victim or homeowner they suffer tax revenue. So city can bring the action of the sort and were talking about one subprime mortgage that results in the foreclosure. If they can say that is caused by discriminatory housing practice and injured them, yes. Its just like the residents or the city in gladstone. They are able to say we are injured by the. Thank you. You have four minutes. With respect to this complaint, we agree that they do identify and impress but they have to plausibly an impact on segregation. The havent done that and they havent told you whether that is increased or decreased as a result of the banks conduct. Second, the damages they sick are seek our way broader. The complaints are about enough since one of the complaints by the same counsel against cobb county seeking hundreds of millions of dollars. There 19300 cities in america. If you adopt the theory you would be allowing all of them to bring complaints just like that. We have said that if you accept their interpretation you be opening the door. The solicitor general says no, a proximate cause of limitation. The approximate cause is a brief explain eliminates the directness requirement. I think it would be hard and thats why on the magazine are things like that you ask how is the opinion and the answer was look at gladstone. Gladstone has a direct reduction in Property Values. That cannot be inconsistent theory with this court for many reasons. Its not brief to argue. Even the language hes reading is only at the very end of gladstone saying that if you had a reduction in Property Values that would directly reduce the taxpayer. You have five steps before you even get to the reduction of the Property Value. Each of those are opportunities for interviewing causes and all of the things that this court lacks of the reasons why we cut off liability at the first step. His other answer was to look at the congressional report. That identifies that congress is concerned with Property Values and therefore concerned with cities. That also says that congress is equally concerned with employers who suffered from segregated neighborhoods, employees who are fired because the neighborhood suffered from white and shops and other things. If you take their standard which is look at the congressional report and figure out whos harmed from housing discrimination you would come to the same conclusion we do which is it would allow landlords and gardeners to soup. This also gets to your point earlier if you adopt on the interpretation, 3612 it allows persons to intervene as a matter of right and federal litigation. What congress did was empower direct victims to sue as well as some direct victims and the Justice Department. Their interpretation says any city could in does not influenced by any city of miami can come in and intervene in a direct victims lawsuit and go off in any direction. That cannot possibly be what congress thought about when they used the word person agreed in the statue. To allow cities to come in and interfere with that kind of lawsuit. It is hard to think that congress would know that in 1988 when we have already let a Village Committee and a municipality. But its very important. We are not crippling with that. Gladstone is 100 law, were not seeking to change it. They are the one seeking to expand into directions but by taking it out of segregation and by proximate cause. Thank you counsel, the cases emitted. Heres a look at our schedule and the cspan networks. Starting at 8 00 p. M. Easterns on cspan, remarks from Arizona Supreme CourtJustice Clint on federal and state judiciaries. On cspan2, spoke to be with books and authors who have written about language and communication. On cspan three, American History tv with a look back to the year 1967 focusing on the Hippie Movement in san francisco, the vietnam war, and the israeli sixday war. Cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact too. Coming up thursday morning, barry lynn executive director of the americas united for the separation of church and state will talk about Supreme Court handling between church and state. Then tom devon will address the clinical consequences of the effort to repeal obama care. Watch cspans washington journal, live at 7 00 a. M. Thursday morning. Join the discussion. Thursday at 7 00 p. M. Eastern, join American History tv for a live tour with the museum of American Revolution in philadelphia. The museums president ceo, Michael Quinn and collections and exhibitions Vice PresidentScott Stevenson will introduce artifacts and throughout the museum. Also piece of the northbridge from the battle of concorde. Her stories about the American Revolution and you can participate in the lie program with your phone calls and tweets. Watch American History tv, live from the museum of American Revolution, thursday starting at 7 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan three. This weekend on American History tv on cspan three. Saturday the p. M. Eastern on lectures in history. University of washington Professor William talks about the 1950s beaten beatniks to the hippies. The beats were veterans of the Great Depression and world war ii, the holocaust in the atomic age. The hippies were the optimistic children of the baby boom generation and the rising affluence of the postwar consumer boom. At 10 00 a. M. Eastern on real america. Thirty years ago all over north appear before the house and Senate Committees investigating the irancontra affair. People ought not to believe how youre asking that question. That we intentionally deceive the american people. Had that intent to begin with. The efforts to conduct these operations was made in such a way that our adversaries were not have knowledge of it or that we could deny association with them or the association of this government for those activities. That is not wrong. Sunday at, history, authors and ron paul explore the com cot consequences of postworld war ii people who liked authoritarianism they know its illegal for an individual to go into your house and take what they want. Fortunately that moral standard still exists. You cannot personally take from people in her people. It happens but most people recognize a candidate. But its not illegal for the government to do it. For the complete schedule go to cspan. Org. Earlier today, the United NationsSecurity Council held a meeting to discuss the latest development in north korea. After that country lost in intercontinental ballistic missile. This is one hour 20 minutes