The Color of Law A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America by Richard Rothstein (z-lib.org).epub

nearby. The university not only subsidized the associations but from 1933 to
1947 spent $100,000 on legal services to defend covenants and evict African
Americans who had arrived in its neighborhood. When criticized for these
activities, University of Chicago president Robert Maynard Hutchins wrote
in 1937 that the university “must endeavor to stabilize its neighborhood as
an area in which its students and faculty will be content to live,” and that
therefore the university had the “right to invoke and defend” restrictive
covenants in its surrounding areas.
II
INSURANCE COMPANIES also participated in segregation. They have large
reserve funds to invest, and because they are heavily regulated, state policy
makers are frequently involved in plans for any housing projects that
insurers propose.
In 1938, when Frederick Ecker, president of the Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company, wanted to build the 12,000-unit Parkchester apartments
in New York City, he could not proceed without an amendment to the state’s
insurance code, permitting insurers to invest in low-rent housing. The state
legislature adopted the amendment, fully aware that it was authorizing a
project from which African Americans would be excluded.
After Parkchester was completed in 1942, Metropolitan Life embarked on
a new project, the 9,000-unit Stuyvesant Town housing complex on the east
side of Manhattan. For the development, New York City condemned and
cleared eighteen square city blocks and transferred the property to the
insurance company. The city also granted Metropolitan Life a twenty-fiveyear
tax abatement, whose value meant that far more public than private
money was invested in the project. The subsidies were granted despite
Metropolitan Life’s announcement that, like Parkchester, the project would
be for “white people only.” Ecker advised the New York City Board of
Estimate that “Negroes and whites don’t mix. If we brought them into this
development . . . it would depress all of the surrounding property.” Because
of the project’s refusal to accept African Americans, the board was divided