EI Series_Month 5_9.5.25-final

Month 5: The Civil Rights Movement and Economic Justice Despite decades of civil rights progress in the United States, contemporary federal policies continue to perpetuate economic and social disparities.

This paper examines landmark reforms such as the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the Brown v.

Board of Education ruling, which sought to dismantle structural disparities in housing and education. While these efforts achieved important legal and social milestones, inequities persisted, reflecting unsolved structural challenges. Recent federal policies under the second Trump administration, such as cuts to HUD programs, the rollback of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, reductions to Title one and increased push for school choice, have further weakened key equity protections. Simultaneously, this does offer opportunities to readdress how to sufficiently advance fairness through market-oriented solutions, targeted funding, and community-centered choice. By analyzing historical context alongside modern policies, this paper explores both the longstanding gaps in equity and practical approaches for promoting opportunity, economic mobility, and local empowerment.

The Fair Housing Act and Its Effects on Income Inequality The Fair Housing Act (FHA) of 1968 represented a significant milestone in the Civil Rights Movement, aiming to eliminate housing discrimination based on race, religion, national origin, and later, gender and disability. However, its effects on reducing economic inequality have been limited. Homeownership remains the primary way most American families build wealth, yet racial disparities in access to housing are prevalent.

As of 2023, the homeownership rate for White households stood at 72.4%, compared to 45% for Black households and 51% for Hispanic households. Wealth disparities mirror these housing gaps, with the median net worth of White households in 2022 being $284,310, $44,100 for Black households and $62,120 for Hispanic households. While the FHA banned overt discrimination, new forms of bias emerged, including algorithmic lending systems that disproportionately deny mortgages to minority applicants. The gap in Black–White homeownership rates is now larger than it was in 1968, underscoring the need for continued reforms.

Under the current administration, federal housing policies have moved to undermine the Fair Housing Act by reducing enforcement of fair housing protections. As of January 2025, the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) terminated the AFFH, which required local governments receiving federal funds to actively identify and address segregation and discriminatory housing patterns. Additionally, the President’s proposed FY2026 budget includes a 44% cut to HUD programs, eliminating funding for the Community Development Block Grant

(CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership programs, which could increase homelessness and exacerbate racial and economic disparities in housing access. However, the House plan appears to be more pragmatic in addressing housing affordability, focusing more on reforms rather than sweeping cuts.

The Fight for School Desegregation and Equal Education Funding The Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision struck down “separate but equal” schooling, ruling that separate education facilities for African Americans and White students were unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Ending this doctrine established in the 1896 case Plessy v. Ferguson was intended to mark the beginning of the end for legalized racial segregation in public schools. However, the struggle for educational equity continued long after. By the 1970s, many districts had implemented desegregation plans, but resistance, White flight, and inequitable funding structures limited their impact.

Today, school segregation remains a stubborn reality. Between 2022 and 2023, Department of Education data showed that 83% of Black students and 82% of Latino students attended majority non-White schools, while 75% of White students attended majority-White schools. Because most U.S. school funding is tied to local property taxes, predominantly Black and Latino districts receive $23 billion less annually than majority-White districts despite serving the same number of students. These disparities are evident in East Baton Rouge Parish, where the majority-Black school system is under strain following the creation of a new, majority-White district, St. George, diverting both resources and tax revenue away from the larger district. This bars many workingclass Black families, segregating the city even further. Beyond Louisiana, housing pressures in major cities are compounding the problem as rising costs are pushing families into surrounding suburbs, leaving urban districts with fewer resources to educate students.

Charter schools and private school vouchers have added another layer to this problem. Research shows that both have accelerated re-segregation in low-wealth communities, as they often draw motivated families and public resources away from traditional public schools without improving overall outcomes. According to a 2020 UCLA Civil Rights Project report, over 64% of Black students in New York attend intensely segregated schools where 90–100% of the student body is non-White. This is followed by California, Illinois, and Maryland. Voucher programs also disproportionately benefit families with greater means to supplement costs, leaving behind underfunded neighborhood schools that serve the poorest and most vulnerable students. Recent data shows that most voucher users come from higher-income households, even though lowincome families are the intended target group. This deepens the cycle of inequality, as majorityminority communities with weaker property tax bases are left with fewer resources to compete, reinforcing both educational and wealth disparities.

Under the current administration, several federal actions are rolling back support for desegregation and equitable funding. The Department of Education is being gradually

dismantled, transferring core civil rights enforcement functions to the states or other agencies.

This reduces funding for under-resourced and segregated school districts with majority-minority students. Title I programs face $428 million in cuts to sub-programs serving migrant students, even as overall Title I funding is nominally preserved. Additionally, the push for school choice, private vouchers, and charter school funding is heavily criticized for diverting resources from public schools, uneven outcomes, and exacerbating racial and economic segregation in education.

These policy shifts intersect directly with the racial wealth and homeownership gap. MajorityWhite communities often have higher property values and stronger tax bases, giving them betterfunded schools. In contrast, majority-minority communities face both lower homeownership rates and lower property values, which shrink local revenue and force greater reliance on federal programs like Title I and ESL. By targeting these very programs for cuts, the administration is weakening the federal role in combating segregation and perpetuating disparities in resources for underfunded school districts.

Policy Recommendations To address the persistent unfairness highlighted across housing and education, several targeted policy measures are feasible. In housing, expanding targeted counseling and credit access programs can empower homebuyers from low to moderate-income communities. By providing financial literacy training, down-payment assistance, and fair lending guidance, these programs promote homeownership and wealth-building without imposing additional federal mandates, aligning with the administration’s emphasis on individual opportunity and private initiative.

In education, a combination of targeted use of Title I funding and school choice safeguards can create equal access for all students in the public school system. Title I funds should be directed to students and schools with the greatest need, with clear performance benchmarks to ensure resources are used effectively. Charter schools and voucher programs can remain key tools for parental choice, but safeguards should be added to ensure they predominantly serve families in low-wealth areas. The administration can reinforce local control, parental choice, and academic innovation, all central priorities of their school choice agenda.

Conclusion In conclusion, civil rights struggle across housing and education demonstrates that legal protections alone are insufficient to achieve lasting economic and social equity. Some of the policies introduced by the current administration are unfavorable, however, there remain opportunities to readdress the framework without imposing heavy-handed federal mandates. For example, expanding financial counseling and credit access for homebuyers, directing Title I resources to the highest-need students, and implementing safeguards for charter and voucher programs in low-wealth areas, offer actionable solutions to reduce unfair outcomes. By

leveraging these strategies, the administration can advance economic empowerment, academic equity, and community resilience.