Wells Fargo & Co. v. City of Miami

Holding

(1) The city of Miami is an "aggrieved person" authorized to bring suit under the Fair Housing Act; and (2) the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred in concluding that the city's complaints, charging that the banks engaged in discriminatory conduct that led to a disproportionate number of foreclosures and vacancies in majority-minority neighborhoods, which diminished the city's property-tax revenue and increased the demand for police, fire, and other municipal services, met the FHA's proximate-cause requirement based solely on the finding that the city's alleged financial injuries were foreseeable results of the banks' misconduct; proximate cause under the FHA requires "some direct relation between the injury asserted and the injurious conduct alleged"; the lower courts should define, in the first instance, the contours of proximate cause under the FHA and decide how that standard applies to the city's claims for lost property-tax revenue and increased municipal expenses.

Judgment

Vacated and remanded, 5-3, in an opinion by Stephen G. Breyer on May 1, 2017. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Justices Kennedy and Alito joined. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases.

Recommended Citation: Wells Fargo & Co. v. City of Miami, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/wells-fargo-co-v-city-of-miami/