Figure 1: Black-White Denial Disparity Over Time
Note: Estimated denial rate disparities between Black and
White applicants over time at banks subject to litigation. Estimated
denial disparities only include by-year disparities at such banks, with
the year that litigation was filed defined as 0. The figure does not
include overall racial disparities at such banks, nor does it include
industry-wide denial disparities.
Figure 1 Figure Type: Line chart with 95% confidence intervals Title: Black-White Denial Disparity Over Time Axes: X-axis: Year Relative to Litigation Filing (ranging from -4 to 4) Y-axis: Denial Rate Disparity in percentage points (ranging from -10 to 10) Data Series: Denial Rate Disparity vs Competitors (black line with square markers and gray confidence interval bars) Data Points: Year -4: approximately 2.0 percentage points Year -2: approximately -2.5 percentage points Year -1: approximately 4.0 percentage points (peak) Year 0 (litigation filing): approximately 0.0 percentage points Year 1: approximately -2.0 percentage points Year 2: approximately -5.0 percentage points (lowest point) Year 3: approximately -4.0 percentage points Year 4: approximately -4.0 percentage points Key Trends: The figure shows a change in denial rate disparities between Black and White mortgage applicants at banks subject to fair lending litigation relative to their local competitors. Before litigation, disparities fluctuate, with a peak of approximately 4 percentage points in year -1. At the time of litigation filing (year 0), the disparity drops sharply to near zero. Following litigation: from year 1 onward, the relative disparity becomes negative and stabilizes around -4 percentage points.
Figure 2: Black-White Denial Disparity Over Time, Relative to Disparity
Pre-Litigation
Note: Estimated denial rate disparities between Black and
White applicants over time at banks subject to litigation, relative to
the pre-litigation disparity at litigated banks.
Figure Type: Line chart with 95% confidence intervals Title: Black-White Denial Disparity Over Time, Relative to Disparity Pre-Litigation Axes: X-axis: Year Relative to Litigation Filing (ranging from 0 to 4) Y-axis: Denial Rate Disparity in percentage points (ranging from -8 to 4) Data Series: Denial Rate Disparity vs Competitors relative to Pre-Litigation (black line with square markers and gray confidence interval bars) Reference Line: Horizontal line at 0 percentage points (red/pink dashed line representing the pre-litigation baseline) Data Points: Year 0 (litigation filing): approximately -1.0 percentage points Year 1: approximately -3.0 percentage points Year 2: approximately -6.0 percentage points (lowest point) Year 3: approximately -5.0 percentage points Year 4: approximately -5.0 percentage points Key Trends: The figure shows the change in denial rate disparities between Black and White mortgage applicants at banks subject to fair lending litigation relative to their local competitors, normalized to the pre-litigation disparity level. At the time of litigation filing (year 0), the relative disparity is approximately -1 percentage point below the pre-litigation baseline. The disparity continues to decline, reaching its lowest point of approximately -6 percentage points in year 2. From year 3 onward, the relative disparity stabilizes around -5 percentage points, indicating a sustained reduction in denial rate disparities compared to the pre-litigation period.
Figure 3: Post-litigation Change in Black Applicant Denial Rate Across
Litigated Banks
Note: The Y axis reports the change in the Black-White
disparity in denial rates (measured in percentage points), relative to
pre-litigation. Markers sized by lender’s post-litigation loan volume.
Not pictured: the post-litigation trend at First United Security Bank
following US v. First United Security Bank (2009). In that litigation,
which we exclude here given how much of an outlier result it is, the
Black-White denial disparity increased by a statistically
significant 58 percentage points after litigation.
Figure 3 Figure Type: Scatter plot with 95% confidence intervals and combined estimate Title: Post-litigation Change in Black Applicant Denial Rate Across Litigated Banks Axes: X-axis: Individual litigated banks/cases (not explicitly numbered; approximately 20+ cases shown from left to right) Y-axis: Change in Black-White denial disparity in percentage points (ranging from -4 to +0.1) Data Series: Case specific estimates: Individual circles with vertical confidence interval bars. Circle size represents lender's post-litigation loan volume (larger circles indicate higher loan volumes) Combined estimate: Horizontal dashed line (blue) at approximately -3.9 percentage points Reference line: Horizontal line at 0 percentage points (black) Data Points: The scatter plot shows approximately 20+ individual case estimates with varying confidence intervals. Key Trends: The figure displays case-by-case variation in the post-litigation change in Black applicant denial rates across litigated banks. Most cases show negative values, indicating a reduction in the Black-White denial disparity following litigation. Larger circles, representing banks with higher post-litigation loan volumes, tend to cluster in the negative range. The wide range of estimates (from slightly positive to approximately -20 percentage points) demonstrates substantial heterogeneity in outcomes across litigated institutions, with most showing decreased denial disparities for Black applicants post-litigation.
Figure 4: Cases Reviewed But Excluded from Our Sample
| Case | Reason for Exclusion |
|---|---|
| Church of Zion Christian Center v. Southtrust Bank | Private non-class suit that didn't center mortgage loans |
| Housing Opportunities Made Equal a/k/a HOME v. Nationwide Insurance | Insurance redlining, not mortgage redlining |
| Sallion v. Suntrust Banks, Inc. | Mortgage discrimination but class cert denied on appeal |
| Milton v. Bancplus Mortgage Corporation | Mortgage discrimination but class cert denied on appeal |
| US v. Auto Fare (2014) | Auto lending market, not mortgage |
| US v. Synchrony Bank f/k/a GE Capital Retail Bank (2014) | Credit card lending |
| US v. Fifth Third Mortgage (2014) | disability discrimination |
| US v. First United Bank (2014) | consumer loans, not mortgages |
| US v. Sallie Mae (2014) | pre service loans, not mortgages |
| US v. Santander (2014) | unlawful repossession of automobiles |
| US v. American Honda Finance Corp (2015) | Auto lending |
| US v. Fifth Third Bank (2015) | Auto Lending |
| US v. Toyota Motor Credit Corp (2015) | Auto lending |
| US v. Evergreen Bank Group (2015) | motorcycle lending |
| US v. Evolve Bank & Trust (2015) | disability discrimination |
| US v. Charter Bank (2016) | vehicle secured consumer loans |
| US v. The Home Loan Auditors (2016) | mortgage loan modification |
| US v. First Federal Bank of Florida (2016) | discriminiation on basis of familial status(maternity) |
| US v. Hatfield (2017) | sexual harrassment |
| US v. COPOCO Community Credit Union (2017) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v CitiFinancial Credit Co (2017) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v. Westlake Services (2017) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., d/b/a Wells Fargo Dealer Services (2017) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v. Northwest Trustee Services (2017) | illegal home foreclosure |
| US v. Advocate Law Groups of Florida (2018) | mortgage loan modification |
| US v. BMW Financial Services (2018) | Motor vehicle lease terminations |
| US v. Northwest Trustee Services (2018) | Home foreclosures |
| US v. Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union (2018) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v. California Auto Finance (2018) | illegal auto repossession |
| US v. Guaranteed Auto Sales (2019) | race discrimination on auto loans |
| US v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp (2019) | Auto repossessions |
| US v. PHH Mortgage Corp (2019) | home forclosures |
| US v. Bank of America (2020) | discrimination on basis of disability |
| US v. Conn Credit (2021) | overcharged interest rates |
| US v. New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority (2021) | Student loan case |
| US v. Ally Financial Inc and Ally Bank (2013) | auto lending |
| US v. Nara Bank (2013) | auto lending |
| US v. Bank of America (2012) | discrimination on basis of disability |
| US v. Union Auto Sales (2012) | Discrimination in auto lending |
| US et al., v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (2012) | Not discrimination on basis of race |
| US v. Capital One (2012) | not a mortgage case |
| US v. Nixon State Bank (2011) | consumer loans |
| US v. Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corp (2011) | sex based discrimination |
| US v BAC Home Loans Servicing (2011) | wrongful foreclosure |
| US v Saxon Mortgage Services (2011) | wrongful foreclosure |
| US v. Nationwide Nevada (2008) | refused to purchase automobile contracts based on ethnicity |
| US v. Compass Bank (2007) | Discrimination on basis of marital status |
| US v. Springfield Ford (2007) | Discrimination on car loan rates |
| US v. Pacifico Ford (2007) | Discrimination on car loan rates |
| US v. First Nat'l Bank of Pontotoc (2007) | sexual harassment of female borrowers |
| US v. Fifth Third Bank (2004) | discrimination on basis of race for business loans |
| US v. Fidelity Federal Bank (2002) | credit card program discrimination |
| US v. Associates National Bank (2001) | credit card program discrimination |
| US v. Deposit Guaranty National Bank (1999) | Home improvement loan discrimination |
| Cason v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp (2000) | higher finance charges for African Americans at Nissan Dealerships |
| Louisiana ACORN Fair Housing v. LeBlanc (1998) | rent discrimination |
| Regional Economic Community Action Program, Inc. v. City of Middletown (1998) | discrimination against alcoholics |
| US v. Big D Enterprises (1998) | Discrimination against African American renters |
| US v. City of Lake Station (1998) | City refused to permit development of affordable, owner occupied, single family homes |
| US v. City of Toledo (1998) | discrimination on basis of disability |
| US v. Crawford (1998) | sexual harassment |
| US v. Damron (1998) | refused to rent to African Americans |
| US v. Gardner (1998) | discrimination against children |
| US v. Inland Empire Builders (1998) | discrimination on basis of disability |
| US v. Krueger (1998) | sexual and racial harassment of black tenants |
| US v. Lexington Village Apartments and Hillcrest Village (1998) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Nejam Properties (1998) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Richmond (1998) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Vernon (1998) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Village of Addison (1998) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Housing Authority of the Town of Milford (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Las Vegas Jaycees Senior Citizens Mobile Home Community (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (1997) | Discrimination in home insurance |
| US v. Rock Springs Vista Development Corp (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Town of Cicero (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Williams (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Associates National Bank (1997) | discrimination in credit card applications |
| US v. Big D Enterprises (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Choice Property Consultants (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. City of Milwaukee (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Hagadone (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Harlan (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. JDL Management (1997) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Cedar Builders (1996) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. City of Waukegan (1996) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Village of Hatch (1996) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. American Family Mutual Insurance (1995) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. City of Pharma (1995) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Pinewood Associates (1995) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Secutiry State Bank (1995) | discrimination in consumer loans |
| US v. Veal (1994) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Blackpipe State Bank (1994) | not discrimination on mortgages |
| US v. Chevy Chase Bank (1994) | not discrimination on mortgages |
| US v. First National Bank of Vicksburg (1994) | Home improvement loan discrimination |
| US v. Jacksonville Housing Authority and City of Jacksonville (1994) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Nedialkov (1994) | defendant not a mortgage originator |
| US v. Flagstar Corporation and Denny's (1993) | not discrimination on mortgages |
| US v. Plaza Mobile Estates (1991) | defendant not a mortgage originator |