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

p. 80, 4 Pates 1948; Claremont Improvement Club v. Buckingham 1948.
p. 81, 1 Miller 1965b, 2–3.
p. 81, 2 Thompson 2014.
p. 81, 3 Kushner 1979, 562–66; McGovney 1945, 6–11.
p. 82, 1 Power 2004, 791–92, 801–2; Power 1983, 315; California Eagle
1943a.
p. 82, 2 Corrigan v. Buckley 1926.
p. 82, 3 Bartholomew 1932, 50, 57–58; Weiss 1989; Monchow 1928, 50,
72–73. The 1928 review written by Helen Monchow was published
by the Institute for Research in Land Economics and Public
Utilities. At the time, the institute was the most influential national
urban planning organization. The review quoted extensively from
the recent (1926) Supreme Court opinion (Corrigan v. Buckley)
upholding the validity of deeds that prevented resales to African
Americans: “This contention (that the covenant is void in that it is
contrary to and forbidden by the 5th, 13th, and 14th Amendments)
is entirely lacking in substance or color of merit. The fifth
Amendment is a limitation only upon the powers of the general
government and is not directed against the action of individuals.
The thirteenth Amendment involving slavery and involuntary
servitude, that is, a condition of enforced compulsory service of
one to another, does not in other matters protect the individual
rights of persons of the negro race. And the prohibitions of the
fourteenth Amendment have reference to state action exclusively
and not to any action of private individuals. It is state action of a
particular character that is prohibited. Individual invasion of
individual rights is not the subject matter of the amendment.”
p. 83, 2 FHA 1935, Part II, Sections 309–12.
p. 83, 3 FHA 1936, Part II, Sections 284 (2)–(3).
p. 84, 2 Johnson 1993, 92. For Peninsula Housing Association sources, see
notes to p. 10, 4; for St. Ann sources, see notes to p. 73, 1; for
Levittown sources, see notes to pp. 70, 1, and 72, 1. Dean 1947,
430–31. Hirsch 2000a, 207–9, concludes that the FHA made
restrictive covenants a “virtual precondition for federally insured
mortgages.” For particular loan guarantees, the FHA required
restrictive covenants, but as a general policy the FHA strongly
recommended such covenants. A builder could commit not to sell
to African Americans even if no racial covenant was attached to
the deed. The FHA did insure some loans without covenants. A