arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
argued
october
decided
january
respondent
metropolitan
housing
development
mhdc
nonprofit
developer
contracted
purchase
tract
within
boundaries
petitioner
village
order
build
racially
integrated
housing
contract
contingent
upon
securing
rezoning
well
federal
housing
assistance
mhdc
applied
village
necessary
rezoning
classification
series
village
plan
commission
public
meetings
supporters
opponents
touched
upon
fact
project
probably
racially
integrated
opponents
also
stressed
zoning
factors
pointed
toward
denial
mhdc
application
location
always
zoned
village
apartment
policy
called
limited
use
zoning
primarily
buffer
development
commercial
manufacturing
districts
none
adjoined
project
proposed
location
village
denied
rezoning
mhdc
individual
minority
respondents
filed
suit
injunctive
declaratory
relief
alleging
denial
racially
discriminatory
violated
inter
alia
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
fair
housing
act
district
held
village
rezoning
denial
motivated
racial
discrimination
desire
protect
property
values
maintain
village
zoning
plan
though
approving
conclusions
appeals
reversed
finding
ultimate
effect
rezoning
denial
racially
discriminatory
observing
denial
disproportionately
affect
blacks
particularly
view
fact
general
suburban
area
though
economically
expanding
continued
marked
residential
segregation
held
mhdc
least
one
individual
respondent
standing
bring
action
pp
mhdc
met
constitutional
standing
requirements
showing
injury
fairly
traceable
petitioners
acts
challenged
action
village
stands
absolute
barrier
constructing
housing
mhdc
contracted
barrier
removed
injunctive
relief
granted
mhdc
despite
contingency
provisions
contract
suffered
economic
injury
based
upon
expenditures
made
support
rezoning
petition
well
noneconomic
injury
defeat
objective
embodied
specific
project
making
suitable
housing
available
housing
scarce
pp
whether
mhdc
standing
assert
constitutional
rights
prospective
minority
tenants
need
decided
least
one
individual
respondents
negro
working
village
desirous
securing
housing
lives
miles
away
standing
focusing
specific
mhdc
project
adequately
alleged
actionable
causal
relationship
village
zoning
practices
asserted
injury
warth
seldin
pp
proof
racially
discriminatory
intent
purpose
required
show
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
respondents
failed
carry
burden
proving
intent
purpose
motivating
factor
village
rezoning
decision
pp
official
action
held
unconstitutional
solely
results
racially
disproportionate
impact
impact
irrelevant
sole
touchstone
invidious
racial
discrimination
washington
davis
racially
discriminatory
intent
evidenced
factors
disproportionate
impact
historical
background
challenged
decision
specific
antecedent
events
departures
normal
procedures
contemporary
statements
decisionmakers
must
shown
pp
evidence
warrant
overturning
concurrent
findings
courts
proof
warranting
conclusion
village
rezoning
decision
racially
motivated
pp
statutory
question
whether
rezoning
decision
violated
fair
housing
act
decided
appeals
considered
remand
powell
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
blackmun
rehnquist
joined
marshall
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
brennan
joined
post
white
filed
dissenting
opinion
post
stevens
took
part
consideration
decision
case
jack
siegel
argued
cause
filed
briefs
petitioners
willis
caruso
argued
cause
respondents
briefs
carol
petersen
robert
schwemm
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
conrad
bagne
american
society
planning
officials
abe
fortas
stephen
shamberg
league
women
voters
et
al
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
respondent
metropolitan
housing
development
corporation
mhdc
applied
petitioner
village
arlington
heights
rezoning
parcel
classification
using
federal
financial
assistance
mhdc
planned
build
clustered
townhouse
units
tenants
village
denied
rezoning
request
mhdc
joined
plaintiffs
also
respondents
brought
suit
district
northern
district
illinois
alleged
denial
racially
discriminatory
violated
inter
alia
fourteenth
amendment
fair
housing
act
stat
et
seq
following
bench
trial
district
entered
judgment
village
supp
respondents
appealed
appeals
seventh
circuit
reversed
finding
ultimate
effect
denial
racially
discriminatory
refusal
rezone
therefore
violated
fourteenth
amendment
granted
village
petition
certiorari
reverse
arlington
heights
suburb
chicago
located
miles
northwest
downtown
loop
area
land
arlington
heights
zoned
detached
homes
fact
prevailing
land
use
village
experienced
substantial
growth
like
communities
northwest
cook
county
population
racial
minority
groups
remained
quite
low
according
census
village
residents
black
clerics
viator
religious
order
order
parcel
east
center
arlington
heights
part
site
occupied
viatorian
high
school
part
order
novitiate
building
houses
dormitories
montessori
school
much
site
however
remains
vacant
since
village
first
adopted
zoning
ordinance
land
surrounding
viatorian
property
zoned
specification
relatively
small
minimum
requirements
three
sides
viatorian
land
homes
across
street
east
viatorian
property
directly
adjoins
backyards
homes
order
decided
devote
land
housing
investigation
revealed
expeditious
way
build
housing
work
nonprofit
developer
experienced
use
federal
housing
subsidies
national
housing
act
stat
added
amended
mhdc
developer
organized
several
prominent
chicago
citizens
purpose
building
housing
throughout
chicago
area
mhdc
process
building
one
development
near
arlington
heights
already
provided
federally
assisted
housing
smaller
scale
parts
chicago
area
negotiation
mhdc
order
entered
lease
accompanying
agreement
sale
covering
site
southeast
corner
viatorian
property
mhdc
became
lessee
immediately
sale
agreement
contingent
upon
mhdc
securing
zoning
clearances
village
housing
assistance
federal
government
mhdc
proved
unsuccessful
securing
either
lease
contract
sale
lapse
agreement
established
bargain
purchase
price
low
enough
comply
federal
limitations
governing
costs
housing
mhdc
engaged
architect
proceeded
project
known
lincoln
green
plans
called
buildings
total
units
unit
private
entrance
outside
one
hundred
units
single
bedroom
thought
likely
attract
elderly
citizens
remainder
two
three
four
bedrooms
large
portion
site
remain
open
shrubs
trees
screen
homes
abutting
property
east
planned
development
conform
village
zoning
ordinance
built
unless
arlington
heights
rezoned
parcel
housing
classification
accordingly
mhdc
filed
village
plan
commission
petition
rezoning
accompanied
supporting
materials
describing
development
specifying
subsidized
materials
made
clear
one
requirement
affirmative
marketing
plan
designed
assure
subsidized
development
racially
integrated
mhdc
also
submitted
studies
demonstrating
need
housing
type
analyzing
probable
impact
development
prepare
hearings
plan
commission
assure
compliance
village
building
code
fire
regulations
related
requirements
mhdc
consulted
village
staff
preliminary
review
development
parties
stipulated
every
change
recommended
consultations
incorporated
plans
spring
plan
commission
considered
proposal
series
three
public
meetings
drew
large
crowds
although
many
attending
quite
vocal
demonstrative
opposition
lincoln
green
number
individuals
representatives
community
groups
spoke
support
rezoning
comments
opponents
supporters
addressed
referred
social
issue
desirability
undesirability
introducing
location
arlington
heights
housing
housing
probably
racially
integrated
many
opponents
however
focused
zoning
aspects
petition
stressing
two
arguments
first
area
always
zoned
neighboring
citizens
built
purchased
reliance
classification
rezoning
threatened
cause
measurable
drop
property
value
neighboring
sites
second
village
apartment
policy
adopted
village
board
amended
called
zoning
primarily
serve
buffer
development
land
uses
thought
incompatible
commercial
manufacturing
districts
lincoln
green
meet
requirement
adjoined
commercial
manufacturing
district
close
third
meeting
plan
commission
adopted
motion
recommend
village
board
trustees
deny
request
motion
stated
need
low
moderate
income
housing
may
exist
arlington
heights
environs
plan
commission
derelict
recommending
proposed
location
two
members
voted
motion
submitted
minority
report
stressing
view
change
accommodate
lincoln
green
represented
good
zoning
village
board
met
september
consider
mhdc
request
recommendation
plan
commission
public
hearing
board
denied
rezoning
vote
following
june
mhdc
three
negro
individuals
filed
lawsuit
village
seeking
declaratory
injunctive
relief
second
nonprofit
corporation
individual
descent
intervened
plaintiffs
trial
resulted
judgment
petitioners
assuming
mhdc
standing
bring
suit
district
held
petitioners
motivated
racial
discrimination
intent
discriminate
groups
denied
rezoning
rather
desire
protect
property
values
integrity
village
zoning
plan
district
concluded
also
denial
racially
discriminatory
effect
divided
appeals
reversed
first
approved
district
finding
defendants
motivated
concern
integrity
zoning
plan
rather
racial
discrimination
deciding
whether
refusal
rezone
discriminatory
effects
complex
observed
refusal
disproportionate
impact
blacks
based
upon
family
income
blacks
constituted
chicago
area
residents
eligible
become
tenants
lincoln
green
although
composed
far
lower
percentage
total
area
population
reasoned
however
decision
james
valtierra
disparity
racial
impact
alone
call
strict
scrutiny
municipality
decision
prevents
construction
housing
another
level
analysis
allegedly
discriminatory
results
invoking
language
kennedy
park
homes
assn
city
lackawanna
cert
denied
appeals
ruled
denial
rezoning
must
examined
light
historical
context
ultimate
effect
northwest
cook
county
enjoying
rapid
growth
employment
opportunities
population
continued
exhibit
high
degree
residential
segregation
held
arlington
heights
simply
ignore
problem
indeed
found
village
exploiting
situation
allowing
become
nearly
community
village
current
plans
building
housing
parcels
village
available
mhdc
economically
feasible
price
background
appeals
ruled
denial
lincoln
green
proposal
racially
discriminatory
effects
tolerated
served
compelling
interests
neither
buffer
policy
desire
protect
property
values
met
exacting
standard
therefore
concluded
denial
violated
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
ii
outset
petitioners
challenge
respondents
standing
bring
suit
clear
challenge
pressed
appeals
since
jurisdiction
decide
case
implicated
jenkins
mckeithen
plurality
opinion
shall
consider
warth
seldin
case
similar
respects
one
reviewed
constitutional
limitations
prudential
considerations
guide
determining
party
standing
need
repeat
discussion
essence
standing
question
constitutional
dimension
whether
plaintiff
alleged
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
warrant
invocation
jurisdiction
justify
exercise
remedial
powers
behalf
quoting
baker
carr
plaintiff
must
show
injured
challenged
action
defendant
injury
may
indirect
see
scrap
complaint
must
indicate
injury
indeed
fairly
traceable
defendant
acts
omissions
simon
eastern
ky
welfare
rights
littleton
linda
richard
little
doubt
mhdc
meets
constitutional
standing
requirements
challenged
action
petitioners
stands
absolute
barrier
constructing
housing
mhdc
contracted
place
viatorian
site
mhdc
secures
injunctive
relief
seeks
barrier
removed
injunction
course
guarantee
lincoln
green
built
mhdc
still
secure
financing
qualify
federal
subsidies
carry
construction
housing
developments
subject
extent
similar
uncertainties
project
detailed
specific
lincoln
green
required
engage
undue
speculation
predicate
finding
plaintiff
requisite
personal
stake
controversy
mhdc
shown
injury
likely
redressed
favorable
decision
simon
eastern
ky
welfare
rights
supra
petitioners
nonetheless
appear
argue
mhdc
lacks
standing
suffered
economic
injury
mhdc
point
owner
property
question
contract
purchase
contingent
upon
securing
rezoning
mhdc
owes
owners
nothing
rezoning
denied
accept
petitioners
argument
first
place
inaccurate
say
mhdc
suffers
economic
injury
refusal
rezone
despite
contingency
provisions
contract
mhdc
expended
thousands
dollars
plans
lincoln
green
studies
submitted
village
support
petition
rezoning
unless
rezoning
granted
many
plans
studies
worthless
even
mhdc
finds
another
site
equally
attractive
price
petitioners
argument
also
misconceives
standing
requirements
long
clear
economic
injury
kind
injury
support
plaintiff
standing
scrap
supra
sierra
club
morton
data
processing
service
camp
mhdc
nonprofit
corporation
interest
building
lincoln
green
stems
desire
economic
gain
rather
interest
making
suitable
housing
available
areas
housing
scarce
mere
abstract
concern
problem
general
interest
see
sierra
club
morton
supra
specific
project
mhdc
intends
build
whether
generate
profits
provides
essential
dimension
specificity
informs
judicial
decisionmaking
schlesinger
reservists
stop
war
clearly
mhdc
met
constitutional
requirements
therefore
standing
assert
rights
foremost
among
mhdc
right
free
arbitrary
irrational
zoning
actions
see
euclid
ambler
realty
nectow
city
cambridge
village
belle
terre
boraas
heart
litigation
never
claim
village
decision
fails
generous
euclid
test
recently
reaffirmed
belle
terre
instead
claim
village
refusal
rezone
discriminates
racial
minorities
violation
fourteenth
amendment
corporation
mhdc
racial
identity
direct
target
petitioners
alleged
discrimination
ordinary
case
party
denied
standing
assert
rights
third
persons
warth
seldin
need
decide
whether
circumstances
case
justify
departure
prudential
limitation
permit
mhdc
assert
constitutional
rights
prospective
minority
tenants
see
barrows
jackson
cf
sullivan
little
hunting
park
buchanan
warley
least
one
individual
plaintiff
demonstrated
standing
assert
rights
respondent
ransom
negro
works
honeywell
factory
arlington
heights
lives
approximately
miles
away
evanston
house
mother
son
complaint
alleged
seeks
qualify
housing
mhdc
wants
build
arlington
heights
ransom
testified
trial
lincoln
green
built
probably
move
since
closer
job
injury
ransom
asserts
quest
housing
nearer
employment
thwarted
official
action
racially
discriminatory
grants
relief
seeks
least
substantial
probability
warth
seldin
supra
lincoln
green
project
materialize
affording
ransom
housing
opportunity
desires
arlington
heights
generalized
grievance
instead
suggested
warth
supra
focuses
particular
project
dependent
speculation
possible
actions
third
parties
see
simon
eastern
ky
welfare
rights
unlike
individual
plaintiffs
warth
ransom
adequately
averred
actionable
causal
relationship
arlington
heights
zoning
practices
asserted
injury
warth
seldin
supra
therefore
proceed
merits
iii
decision
last
term
washington
davis
made
clear
official
action
held
unconstitutional
solely
results
racially
disproportionate
impact
disproportionate
impact
irrelevant
sole
touchstone
invidious
racial
discrimination
proof
racially
discriminatory
intent
purpose
required
show
violation
equal
protection
clause
although
contrary
indications
may
drawn
cases
holding
davis
reaffirmed
principle
well
established
variety
contexts
keyes
school
dist
denver
schools
wright
rockefeller
election
districting
akins
texas
jury
selection
davis
require
plaintiff
prove
challenged
action
rested
solely
racially
discriminatory
purposes
rarely
said
legislature
administrative
body
operating
broad
mandate
made
decision
motivated
solely
single
concern
even
particular
purpose
dominant
primary
one
fact
legislators
administrators
properly
concerned
balancing
numerous
competing
considerations
courts
refrain
reviewing
merits
decisions
absent
showing
arbitrariness
irrationality
racial
discrimination
another
competing
consideration
proof
discriminatory
purpose
motivating
factor
decision
judicial
deference
longer
justified
determining
whether
invidious
discriminatory
purpose
motivating
factor
demands
sensitive
inquiry
circumstantial
direct
evidence
intent
may
available
impact
official
action
whether
bears
heavily
one
race
another
washington
davis
supra
may
provide
important
starting
point
sometimes
clear
pattern
unexplainable
grounds
race
emerges
effect
state
action
even
governing
legislation
appears
neutral
face
yick
wo
hopkins
guinn
lane
wilson
gomillion
lightfoot
evidentiary
inquiry
relatively
easy
cases
rare
absent
pattern
stark
gomillion
yick
wo
impact
alone
determinative
must
look
evidence
historical
background
decision
one
evidentiary
source
particularly
reveals
series
official
actions
taken
invidious
purposes
see
lane
wilson
supra
griffin
school
board
davis
schnell
supp
sd
aff
per
curiam
cf
keyes
school
dist
denver
supra
specific
sequence
events
leading
challenged
decision
also
may
shed
light
decisionmaker
purposes
reitman
mulkey
grosjean
american
press
example
property
involved
always
zoned
suddenly
changed
town
learned
mhdc
plans
erect
integrated
housing
far
different
case
departures
normal
procedural
sequence
also
might
afford
evidence
improper
purposes
playing
role
substantive
departures
may
relevant
particularly
factors
usually
considered
important
decisionmaker
strongly
favor
decision
contrary
one
reached
legislative
administrative
history
may
highly
relevant
especially
contemporary
statements
members
decisionmaking
body
minutes
meetings
reports
extraordinary
instances
members
might
called
stand
trial
testify
concerning
purpose
official
action
although
even
testimony
frequently
barred
privilege
see
tenney
brandhove
nixon
wigmore
evidence
mcnaughton
rev
ed
foregoing
summary
identifies
without
purporting
exhaustive
subjects
proper
inquiry
determining
whether
racially
discriminatory
intent
existed
mind
address
case
us
iv
case
tried
district
reviewed
appeals
decision
washington
davis
supra
respondents
proceeded
erroneous
theory
village
refusal
rezone
carried
racially
discriminatory
effect
without
unconstitutional
courts
understood
least
part
function
examine
purpose
underlying
decision
making
findings
issue
district
noted
opponents
lincoln
green
spoke
various
hearings
might
motivated
opposition
minority
groups
held
however
evidence
warrant
conclusion
motivated
defendants
appeal
appeals
focused
primarily
respondents
claim
village
buffer
policy
consistently
applied
invoked
strictness
demonstrate
underlying
motive
concluded
buffer
policy
though
always
applied
perfect
consistency
several
occasions
formed
basis
board
decision
deny
rezoning
proposals
evidence
necessitate
finding
arlington
heights
administered
policy
discriminatory
manner
appeals
therefore
approved
district
findings
concerning
village
purposes
denying
rezoning
mhdc
also
reviewed
evidence
impact
village
decision
arguably
bear
heavily
racial
minorities
minorities
constitute
chicago
area
population
income
groups
said
eligible
lincoln
green
little
sequence
events
leading
decision
spark
suspicion
area
around
viatorian
property
zoned
since
year
arlington
heights
first
adopted
zoning
map
homes
surround
site
village
undeniably
committed
homes
dominant
residential
land
use
rezoning
request
progressed
according
usual
procedures
plan
commission
even
scheduled
two
additional
hearings
least
part
accommodate
mhdc
permit
supplement
presentation
answers
questions
generated
first
hearing
statements
plan
commission
village
board
members
reflected
official
minutes
focused
almost
exclusively
zoning
aspects
mhdc
petition
zoning
factors
relied
novel
criteria
village
rezoning
decisions
reason
doubt
reliance
neighboring
property
owners
maintenance
zoning
vicinity
village
originally
adopted
buffer
policy
long
mhdc
entered
picture
applied
policy
consistently
us
infer
discriminatory
purpose
application
case
finally
mhdc
called
one
member
village
board
stand
trial
nothing
testimony
supports
inference
invidious
purpose
sum
evidence
warrant
overturning
concurrent
findings
courts
respondents
simply
failed
carry
burden
proving
discriminatory
purpose
motivating
factor
village
decision
conclusion
ends
constitutional
inquiry
appeals
finding
village
decision
carried
discriminatory
ultimate
effect
without
independent
constitutional
significance
respondents
complaint
also
alleged
refusal
rezone
violated
fair
housing
act
et
seq
continue
urge
zoning
decision
made
public
body
may
petitioners
action
violate
appeals
however
proceeding
somewhat
unorthodox
fashion
decide
statutory
question
remand
case
consideration
respondents
statutory
claims
reversed
remanded
footnotes
section
provides
interest
reduction
payments
owners
rental
housing
projects
meet
act
requirements
savings
passed
tenants
accordance
rather
complex
formula
qualifying
owners
effectively
pay
interest
money
borrowed
construct
rehabilitate
purchase
properties
section
amended
frequently
minor
respects
since
litigation
began
see
supp
housing
authorization
act
stat
new
commitments
suspended
executive
decision
revived
projects
formerly
claim
assistance
however
generally
eligible
aid
housing
act
amended
housing
community
development
act
supp
housing
authorization
act
stat
program
department
housing
urban
development
contracts
pay
owner
housing
units
sum
make
difference
fair
market
rent
area
amount
contributed
tenant
eligible
tenant
family
pays
gross
income
rent
respondents
indicated
oral
argument
despite
demise
program
construction
mhdc
project
proceed
zoning
clearance
granted
individual
plaintiffs
sought
certification
action
class
action
pursuant
fed
rule
civ
proc
district
declined
certify
supp
different
district
judge
heard
early
motions
case
sustained
complaint
motion
dismiss
lack
standing
judge
finally
decided
case
said
found
need
reexamine
predecessor
judge
conclusions
respect
ibid
reason
subject
village
action
stringent
review
simply
involves
respondents
interest
securing
housing
lindsey
normet
see
generally
san
antonio
school
dist
rodriguez
language
apparently
derived
decision
reitman
mulkey
quoting
opinion
california
case
review
petitioners
suggest
suspension
program
makes
impossible
mhdc
carry
proposed
project
therefore
deprives
mhdc
standing
district
also
expressed
doubts
mhdc
position
case
light
suspension
whether
termination
available
assistance
programs
preclude
standing
matter
need
decide
view
current
likelihood
subsidies
may
secured
housing
act
amended
housing
community
development
act
see
supra
petitioners
contend
mhdc
lacks
standing
pursue
claim
contract
purchaser
whose
contract
contingent
upon
rezoning
contest
zoning
decision
illinois
courts
law
illinois
owner
property
standing
pursue
action
clark
oil
refining
city
evanston
see
solomon
city
evanston
app
state
law
standing
however
govern
determinations
federal
courts
constitutional
prudential
considerations
canvassed
length
warth
seldin
respond
concerns
peculiarly
federal
nature
illinois
may
choose
close
courts
applicants
rezoning
unless
interest
direct
mhdc
choice
necessarily
disqualify
mhdc
seeking
relief
federal
courts
asserted
injury
federal
rights
presence
plaintiff
need
consider
whether
individual
corporate
plaintiffs
standing
maintain
suit
palmer
thompson
wright
council
city
emporia
cf
see
discussion
washington
davis
mcginnis
royster
somewhat
different
context
observed
search
legislative
purpose
often
elusive
enough
palmer
thompson
without
requirement
primacy
ascertained
legislation
frequently
multipurposed
removal
even
subordinate
purpose
may
shift
altogether
consensus
legislative
judgment
supporting
statute
scholarly
discussion
legislative
motivation
see
brest
palmer
thompson
approach
problem
unconstitutional
legislative
motive
sup
rev
several
cases
fall
category
nature
task
however
permitted
finding
constitutional
violation
even
statistical
pattern
approach
extremes
yick
wo
gomillion
see
turner
fouche
sims
georgia
say
consistent
pattern
official
racial
discrimination
necessary
predicate
violation
equal
protection
clause
single
invidiously
discriminatory
governmental
act
exercise
zoning
power
elsewhere
necessarily
immunized
absence
discrimination
making
comparable
decisions
see
city
richmond
many
instances
recognize
limited
probative
value
disproportionate
impact
merely
acknowledge
heterogeneity
nation
population
jefferson
hackney
see
also
washington
davis
supra
see
progress
development
mitchell
park
board
allegedly
condemned
plaintiffs
land
park
upon
learning
homes
plaintiffs
erecting
sold
marketing
plan
designed
assure
integration
kennedy
park
homes
assn
city
lackawanna
cert
denied
town
declared
moratorium
new
subdivisions
rezoned
area
parkland
shortly
learning
plaintiffs
plans
build
housing
extent
decision
kennedy
park
homes
rested
solely
finding
discriminatory
impact
indicated
disagreement
washington
davis
supra
see
dailey
city
lawton
plaintiffs
dailey
planned
build
housing
site
former
school
purchased
city
refused
rezone
land
pf
public
facilities
classification
residential
surrounding
area
zoned
present
former
planning
director
city
testified
reason
zoning
standpoint
land
classified
based
evidence
appeals
ruled
record
sustains
district
holding
racial
motivation
arbitrary
unreasonable
action
recognized
ever
since
fletcher
peck
cranch
judicial
inquiries
legislative
executive
motivation
represent
substantial
intrusion
workings
branches
government
placing
decisionmaker
stand
therefore
usually
avoided
citizens
preserve
overton
park
volpe
problems
involved
prompted
good
deal
scholarly
commentary
see
tussman
tenbroek
equal
protection
laws
rev
bickel
least
dangerous
branch
ely
legislative
administrative
motivation
constitutional
law
yale
brest
supra
respondents
made
much
one
apparent
procedural
departure
parties
stipulated
village
planner
staff
member
whose
primary
responsibility
covered
zoning
planning
matters
never
asked
written
oral
opinion
rezoning
request
omission
seem
curious
respondents
failed
prove
trial
role
planner
customarily
played
rezoning
decisions
whether
opinion
relevant
respondents
claims
respondents
complain
district
unduly
limited
efforts
prove
village
board
acted
discriminatory
purposes
since
forbade
questioning
board
members
motivation
time
cast
votes
perceive
abuse
discretion
circumstances
case
even
inquiry
motivation
otherwise
proper
see
supra
respondents
allowed
discovery
phase
trial
question
board
members
fully
materials
information
available
time
decision
light
respondents
repeated
insistence
effect
motivation
make
constitutional
violation
district
action
improper
proof
decision
village
motivated
part
racially
discriminatory
purpose
necessarily
required
invalidation
challenged
decision
proof
however
shifted
village
burden
establishing
decision
resulted
even
impermissible
purpose
considered
established
complaining
party
case
kind
longer
fairly
attribute
injury
complained
improper
consideration
discriminatory
purpose
circumstances
justification
judicial
interference
challenged
decision
case
respondents
failed
make
required
threshold
showing
see
mt
healthy
city
board
ed
doyle
post
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
joins
concurring
part
dissenting
part
concur
parts
opinion
however
believe
proper
result
remand
entire
case
appeals
proceedings
consistent
washington
davis
today
opinion
appeals
better
situated
reassess
significance
evidence
developed
light
standards
set
forth
determine
whether
interests
justice
require
district
proceedings
directed
toward
standards
justice
white
dissenting
reverses
judgment
appeals
finds
evidence
supporting
concurrent
findings
espondents
failed
carry
burden
proving
discriminatory
purpose
motivating
factor
village
decision
ante
reaches
result
interpreting
decision
washington
davis
applying
case
notwithstanding
appeals
rendered
decision
case
washington
davis
handed
thus
benefit
decision
found
fourteenth
amendment
violation
gives
reason
failure
follow
usual
practice
situation
vacating
judgment
remanding
order
permit
lower
reconsider
ruling
light
intervening
decision
articulation
legal
standard
nowhere
mentioned
davis
indicates
feels
application
davis
facts
calls
substantial
analysis
true
better
allow
appeals
attempt
analysis
first
instance
given
deems
necessary
evidence
case
light
legal
standard
adopts
remand
especially
appropriate
cases
relied
upon
indicate
primary
function
review
evidence
supporting
findings
lower
courts
see
wright
rockefeller
akins
texas
justification
remanding
constitutional
issue
remand
required
event
respondents
fair
housing
act
claim
et
yet
addressed
appeals
conceding
remand
necessary
appeals
unorthodox
approach
deciding
constitutional
issue
without
reaching
statutory
claim
ante
refuses
allow
appeals
reconsider
constitutional
holding
light
davis
become
necessary
reach
issue
even
convinced
proper
reverse
judgment
basis
intervening
decision
concurrent
findings
fact
believe
wholly
unnecessary
embark
lengthy
discussion
standard
proving
racially
discriminatory
purpose
required
davis
fourteenth
amendment
violation
district
found
village
motivated
legitimate
desire
protect
property
values
integrity
village
zoning
plan
appeals
accepted
finding
clearly
erroneous
quite
properly
refuses
overturn
review
thus
need
list
various
evidentiary
sources
subjects
proper
inquiry
determining
whether
racially
discriminatory
purpose
existed
vacate
judgment
appeals
remand
case
consideration
statutory
issue
necessary
consideration
constitutional
issue
light
washington
davis