Disparate Impact

Discrimination without a discriminatory intent - a neutral rule, test or practice that falls much harder on a protected group and cannot be justified by business necessity - and the statutes under which that theory is and is not available.

Looking for a lawyer rather than a definition? Skip to the state-by-state list of Discrimination law firms.

What it means

Most discrimination claims allege disparate treatment: the employer, landlord or lender treated the person differently because of who they are. Disparate impact is the other theory. It targets a practice that is neutral on its face and applied to everyone - a strength test, a high-school-diploma requirement, a criminal-record screen, a minimum credit score, a zoning rule - but that disproportionately excludes members of a protected group, where the practice cannot be shown to be necessary for the job or the legitimate purpose it serves. No intent to discriminate needs to be proved; the effect and the justification are what is litigated.

The claim proceeds in stages. The person challenging the practice must identify a specific practice and show, usually with statistics, that it causes a significantly disproportionate effect on a protected group. The defendant then must show that the practice is job-related and consistent with business necessity, or serves a substantial, legitimate, non-discriminatory interest. If it does, the challenger may still prevail by showing that a less discriminatory alternative would serve the same interest and the defendant refused to adopt it. Statistical evidence is central, and the choice of comparison population is frequently the whole argument.

The theory is not available under every civil-rights law. It is written into Title VII for employment, recognized by the Supreme Court under the Fair Housing Act, applied to age claims in a narrower form, and available under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Title VI regulations in various ways - but it is not available under the Constitution's equal-protection guarantee, which requires proof of discriminatory purpose, and its scope under particular statutes has been narrowed and broadened by regulation and litigation over the years. Whether disparate impact can be pleaded at all is therefore the first question in any case built on it.

Where this comes from

When people hire a lawyer for this

This is not a claim an individual assembles alone: it depends on data about how a practice affected a whole group, which the defendant holds and will produce only in litigation or an agency investigation. A lawyer or a fair-employment or fair-housing agency can tell you whether the practice you are describing is one the theory reaches and whether there is enough of a pattern to investigate. An individual who was turned down under a neutral rule usually has a stronger and faster claim if there is any evidence of intent - and a lawyer will look for that first.

Worried about the cost? A lawyer can be hired for one part of a case only (limited-scope representation), may be paid from what a claim recovers (contingency fee), or may be free through a pro bono program or legal aid; a court can also waive its own filing fees.

Find Discrimination law firms in your state

Choose your state to see Discrimination law firms in the city where we list the most; your city may be under “other cities”, A to Z. A state marked “Civil & Human Rights” has no Discrimination listing yet and opens the broader page.

• Alabama (Birmingham)
  +1 other city

  • Montgomery
• Alaska (Anchorage)
• Arizona (Chandler)
  +6 other cities

  • Gilbert
  • Glendale
  • Mesa
  • Phoenix
  • Scottsdale
  • Tucson
• Arkansas (Little Rock)
• California (Anaheim)
  +19 other cities

  • Bakersfield
  • Chula Vista
  • Fontana
  • Fremont
  • Irvine
  • Long Beach
  • Riverside
  • Sacramento
  • San Bernardino
  • San Diego
  • San Francisco
  • Santa Ana
  • and 7 more with fewer listed firms
• Colorado (Aurora)
  +2 other cities

  • Colorado Springs
  • Denver
• Connecticut (Bridgeport)
• Delaware (Wilmington)
• District of Columbia (Washington)
• Florida (Hialeah)
  +5 other cities

  • Jacksonville
  • Miami
  • Orlando
  • St Petersburg
  • Tampa
• Georgia (Atlanta)
• Hawaii (Honolulu)
• Idaho (Boise)
• Illinois (Chicago)
• Indiana (Fort Wayne)
  +1 other city

  • Indianapolis
• Iowa (Des Moines)
• Kansas (Kansas City)
• Kentucky (Lexington)
  +1 other city

  • Louisville
• Louisiana (Baton Rouge)
  +2 other cities

  • New Orleans
  • Shreveport
• Maine (Portland)
• Maryland (Baltimore)
• Massachusetts (Boston)
• Michigan (Detroit)
• Minnesota (Minneapolis)
  +1 other city

  • Saint Paul
• Mississippi (Jackson)
• Missouri (Kansas City)
  +1 other city

  • St. Louis
• Montana (Billings)
• Nebraska (Lincoln)
  +1 other city

  • Omaha
• Nevada (Henderson)
  +2 other cities

  • Las Vegas
  • North Las Vegas
• New Hampshire (Manchester)
• New Jersey (Newark)
  +1 other city

  • Jersey City
• New Mexico (Albuquerque)
• New York (Buffalo)
  +2 other cities

  • New York City
  • Rochester
• North Carolina (Charlotte)
  +5 other cities

  • Durham
  • Fayetteville
  • Greensboro
  • Raleigh
  • Winston-Salem
• North Dakota (Fargo)
• Ohio (Cincinnati)
  +3 other cities

  • Cleveland
  • Columbus
  • Toledo
• Oklahoma (Oklahoma City)
  +1 other city

  • Tulsa
• Oregon (Portland)
• Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
  +1 other city

  • Pittsburgh
• Rhode Island (Providence)
• South Carolina (Columbia)
• South Dakota (Sioux Falls, Civil & Human Rights)
• Tennessee (Memphis)
  +1 other city

  • Nashville
• Texas (Arlington)
  +12 other cities

  • Austin
  • Corpus Christi
  • Dallas
  • El Paso
  • Fort Worth
  • Garland
  • Houston
  • Irving
  • Laredo
  • Lubbock
  • Plano
  • San Antonio
• Utah (Salt Lake City)
• Vermont (Burlington)
• Virginia (Chesapeake)
  +3 other cities

  • Norfolk
  • Richmond
  • Virginia Beach
• Washington (Seattle)
  +2 other cities

  • Spokane
  • Tacoma
• West Virginia (Charleston)
• Wisconsin (Madison)
  +1 other city

  • Milwaukee
• Wyoming (Cheyenne)

Related terms

Entries on the same subject:

• Filing a Discrimination Charge (EEOC)The administrative step that must come before almost any federal employment-discrimination lawsuit - a charge filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or a state agency within a short statutory window, followed by a right-to-sue letter that starts the next clock.
• Housing Discrimination (Fair Housing Act)The federal law making it unlawful to refuse housing, or set different terms, because of who someone is.
• Reasonable AccommodationA change to a job, workplace or housing rule that lets a person with a disability participate equally - required unless it imposes undue hardship.
• Retaliation for Protected ActivityThe separate legal wrong of punishing a person for complaining about discrimination, reporting a violation, taking protected leave or helping in an investigation - a claim that often succeeds where the underlying complaint would not.

Other entries in the same area of law, each written from the same primary sources.

• ADA Public Accommodations (Title III)The part of the Americans with Disabilities Act that applies to businesses open to the public - shops, restaurants, hotels, clinics, theaters, and in many courts their websites - requiring access, policy changes and communication aids, with the cost limits that shape what can be demanded.
• Excessive ForceThe constitutional limit on how much force police may use in a stop, an arrest or a search - judged by what a reasonable officer would have done in the moment, and the reason body-camera footage decides more of these cases than testimony does.
• False Arrest and Malicious ProsecutionThe claims available to a person detained without probable cause or prosecuted without it - the state torts, their constitutional counterparts, and the favorable-termination rule that decides when a malicious-prosecution claim can be brought at all.
• Prisoners' Rights and the Prison Litigation Reform ActThe constitutional protections that survive incarceration - against cruel and unusual conditions, deliberate indifference to medical needs, and punishment without process - and the federal statute that makes a prisoner exhaust the prison's own grievance system before any of them can be enforced in court.
• Religious Freedom (RFRA and RLUIPA)The federal statutes that require government to justify any substantial burden on religious exercise by a compelling interest pursued in the least restrictive way - stronger than the constitutional rule, and the basis of most modern religious-liberty claims by prisoners, congregations and employers.
• Section 1983 Civil Rights ClaimThe federal statute allowing someone to sue a state or local official personally for violating their constitutional rights.

« All glossary terms