WASHINGTON — A case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court alleges that the way Texas allocates low-income housing credits violates the 1968 Fair Housing Act, but if the case is decided in Texas’ favor, it could mean an end to a legal theory called “disparate impact.” That theory has been used to bolster the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)’s claims that dealer markup results in discrimination against minority car buyers, Reuters reports.

A ruling against disparate impact could give business groups what they need to challenge the CFPB’s activities in the lending arena. The ruling is expected sometime this week.

To read the full story, click here.