PHILADELPHIA – In response to a troubling nationwide effort to weaken fair housing enforcement, civil rights groups are taking action to attempt to block the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) premature termination of a federal consent order that holds ESSA Bank & Trust accountable for alleged discriminatory redlining in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Philadelphia.

The Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, POWER Interfaith, and the National Fair Housing Alliance, represented by the Public Interest Law Center and Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC, filed a proposed amicus brief Monday urging the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to reject the DOJ’s unopposed motion to end the Consent Order—just two years into its five-year term.

The DOJ’s motion comes as DOJ is moving to dismiss fair lending and other anti-discrimination settlements across the country, including this one in Philadelphia.

“This effort would strip West and Southwest Philadelphia communities of the hard-won protections they were promised just two years ago,” said Rachel Wentworth, Executive Director of the Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania. “For decades banks of all kinds have used redlining to deny neighborhoods of color access to wealth and opportunity, and ending this consent order sends a devastating message to these communities.”

In its original 2023 complaint, the DOJ accused ESSA Bank & Trust of avoiding investment in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, including by excluding Philadelphia from its Community Home Buyer Program, and through advertising and outreach which sought loan applications from the Main Line while largely excluding Philadelphia. According to the DOJ, ESSA had branches within miles of the city but failed to adequately serve the residents of Philadelphia—offering no local loan officers, no targeted outreach, and excluding city residents from its Community Home Buyer Program.

“It is troubling that the Trump Administration continues to pull from the same “Discriminate and Weaken” playbook that it is using to unleash an era of anti-civil rights and anti-consumer policies,” said Lisa Rice, President and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance. “By reversing this consent decree and others, this administration is empowering bad actors and leaving millions of our nation’s most vulnerable unprotected and exposed. Once again, the administration’s actions will only worsen the fair and affordable housing crisis.”

Under the Consent Order, ESSA agreed to:

• Assign loan officers to solicit mortgage applications from Philadelphia neighborhoods it previously ignored;
• Include Philadelphia residents in its program designed for low to moderate income homebuyers;
• Partner with local groups to provide financial education, housing counseling, and foreclosure prevention services;
• Invest $2.92 million in a loan subsidy fund for homebuyers in formerly redlined communities;
• And spend at least $375,000 on advertising, outreach, and consumer education targeted to historically excluded neighborhoods.

“These commitments were designed to bring fairness to the housing market and repair longstanding harm,” said Reverend Gregory Edwards, Executive Director of POWER Interfaith. “Pulling out halfway through would betray the residents of Philadelphia who were promised access and opportunity.”

Represented by the Public Interest Law Center and Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC, the civil rights organizations argue in their brief that the DOJ has failed to meet the legal standard required to terminate a consent order. They note that the United States’ motion includes little explanation, no legal precedent, and no argument about the public interest—an essential requirement for ending a Consent Order like this one. Earlier this month, the Public Interest Law Center represented New Jersey Citizen Action Education Fund, Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, and the National Fair Housing Alliance, in filing a similar proposed amicus brief to assist the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey in a nearly identical attempt by the DOJ to terminate a consent order in Newark, NJ.

“ESSA hasn’t even completed three of its five years of court-ordered obligations,” said Eli Segal of Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC. “The rule of law demands more here than vague assurances of ‘substantial compliance.’ It demands court-ordered action.”

“This isn’t just about one bank,” added Olivia Mania, attorney and Penn Carey Law Catalyst Fellow at the Public Interest Law Center. “It’s about whether the federal government will honor its role in dismantling structural racism in the housing market—or walk away when the cameras are off. The parties should be held to the terms of the Consent Order to ensure real, lasting change.”

Access casefiles here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67454392/united-states-v-essa-bank-trust/