Race-targeted tax remedies fail without proof of discriminatory intent.

Evidence

This isn’t likely to be upheld by the Supreme Court, however. Why? When it comes to allowing race-based remedies, the Supreme Court requires evidence of discriminatory intent as well as discriminatory impact. It wouldn’t matter that the government caused the problem by discriminating against the very racial group that would benefit from this new tax subsidy, as long as the federal government can claim that it didn’t intend these tax policies to be discriminatory. — Dorothy A. Brown, The Whiteness of Wealth, 240

Categorization

• DEFINE: Names the intent-vs-impact hurdle that dooms race-explicit remedies — the legal crux of the whole book.
• XREF: Directly states the book’s thesis phrase ‘facial neutrality’: intent doctrine lets facially neutral policies escape remedy.