Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)

Citation: Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)
Parent Document: Manal Farhan v. 2715 NMA LLC (2025)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2025-12-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10747699/manal-farhan-v-2715-nma-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,572 chars

2019)). We cannot ignore how Farhan doubled down on view-
point discrimination in defending against the motion to dis-
miss. Lest our disagreement with the dissent cloud the issue
for future litigants and district courts, we stress that Farhan
may well have prevailed in the district court—or persuaded
us the district court was in error—with a different presenta-
tion of the underlying facts. But Farhan maintained her view-
point-based theory throughout this litigation, which our
caselaw cannot sustain. And to the extent this goes to a dis-
parate impact theory, Farhan’s complaint falls short, as we
now discuss.
     B. Disparate Impact
    In Bloch, we recognized that a plaintiff may bring a § 3604
discrimination claim without a showing of discriminatory in-
tent under the “modified disparate impact theory” first artic-
ulated in our decision in Arlington Heights. Bloch, 587 F.3d at
784. 4 Under this analysis, we balance the disparate impact of
a policy or action, along with any evidence of discriminatory
intent, against the defendant’s interest in the challenged pol-
icy or action, and the scope of relief sought by the plaintiff.
Arlington Heights, 558 F.2d at 1290–93. The Supreme Court, in
Inclusive Communities, confirmed that disparate impact theo-
ries are cognizable under the FHA. See 576 U.S. at 545. The
Court did, however, instruct courts to “examine with care
whether a plaintiff has made a prima facie showing of dispar-
ate impact,” and clarified that housing policies “are not con-
trary to the disparate-impact requirement unless they are

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text