• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании1804
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации51
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы336
      • Показать ещё
      Разное186
      • Показать ещё
      Издания41
      • Показать ещё
      Люди22
      • Показать ещё
      Показатели36
      • Показать ещё
      Формат9
R&F Properties
Выбор редакции
14 июня, 08:51

Apple представила мобильную операционку iOS 10

Apple представила крупный релиз мобильной операционной системы iOS 10. В ней значительно изменился вид сообщений благодаря добавлению стикеров и эффектов, улучшено взаимодействие с приложениями, а Карты, Фото, Apple Music и Новости представлены в новом оформлении. В приложении Home можно управлять всеми приборами домашней автоматики из единого интерфейса.

Выбор редакции
14 июня, 02:10

Apple представила мобильную операционку iOS 10

Apple представила iOS 10: масштабное обновление Сообщений, новое приложение Home, обновленные "Фото", "Музыка" и "Новости", а также открытый доступ для разработчиков к Siri и приложениям "Карты", "Телефон" и "Сообщения"

Выбор редакции
14 июня, 02:10

Apple представила мобильную операционку iOS 10

Apple представила iOS 10: масштабное обновление Сообщений, новое приложение Home, обновлённые Фото, Музыка и Новости, а также открытый доступ для разработчиков к Siri и приложениям Карты, Телефон и Сообщения

Выбор редакции
14 июня, 02:10

Apple представила мобильную операционку iOS 10

Apple представила iOS 10: масштабное обновление Сообщений, новое приложение Home, обновлённые Фото, Музыка и Новости, а также открытый доступ для разработчиков к Siri и приложениям Карты, Телефон и Сообщения

16 ноября 2015, 14:02

Китайские девелоперы проведут размещение на $7 млрд

Крупнейшие китайские девелоперы Guangzhou R&F Properties и Dalian Wanda Commercial Properties подали заявки на листинг в Шанхае в общей сложности на сумму порядка 47 млрд юаней ($7,37 млрд), пишет Reuters.

16 ноября 2015, 14:02

Китайские девелоперы проведут размещение на $7 млрд

Крупнейшие китайские девелоперы Guangzhou R&F Properties и Dalian Wanda Commercial Properties подали заявки на листинг в Шанхае в общей сложности на сумму порядка 47 млрд юаней ($7,37 млрд), пишет Reuters.

16 ноября 2015, 14:02

Китайские девелоперы проведут размещение на $7 млрд

Крупнейшие китайские девелоперы Guangzhou R&F Properties и Dalian Wanda Commercial Properties подали заявки на листинг в Шанхае в общей сложности на сумму порядка 47 млрд юаней ($7,37 млрд), пишет Reuters.

22 января 2015, 05:06

Newtown Council Votes To Raze Home Of Sandy Hook Shooter

NEWTOWN, Conn. (AP) -- Officials in Newtown voted Wednesday night to tear down the home where Adam Lanza lived before he carried out the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The vote by the Newtown Legislative Council approved a proposal by the board of selectmen to raze the 3,100-square-foot home and keep the land as open space. First Selectwoman Pat Llodra said she expects the Lanza house will be razed once winter is over. The 2-acre property was given to the town in December by a bank that acquired it from the Lanza family. Neighbors had been pleading with town officials to tear down the house of the mass murderer, with one resident saying it's "a constant reminder of the evil that resided there." Inside the large yellow house with green shutters on Yogananda Street is where Lanza shot his mother to death Dec. 14, 2012, before killing 20 first-graders and six educators at nearby Sandy Hook Elementary School. He then committed suicide. Amy DeLoughy, whose house sits across the street, wrote to the council that her children's bus stop had to be moved because it was too scary for the kids to wait near the house. Ian and Nicole Hockley, whose 6-year-old son, Dylan, died in the shooting, have said they moved out of the neighborhood because seeing that house across the way was too painful for them. Neighbor Dave Ackart wrote, "Not only is the property a constant reminder of the evil that resided there - those of us who walk, run, drive, ride or otherwise must pass it multiple times a day, are having a hard time moving on." Llodra was unsure how much demolition would cost, but estimated it could be around $27,000. Legislative Council member Phillip Carroll said a Sandy Hook fundraiser that brought in $1.2 million still has about $260,000 left. "The money for the demolition can come from this fund," he said. Llodra has asked town attorneys to write something into the deed that will prohibit the town from profiting from any future sale or development of the land. "Any proceeds, should the property ever be developed, would be for the benefit of the victims," she said. The Lanza family moved from southern New Hampshire and bought the new house in 1998. It has been sitting vacant since the shooting. Everything inside, including rugs and lighting fixtures, have been removed and incinerated so nothing could become memorabilia. But neighbors say it has become a destination for macabre tourists "who still drive by and pause and take photos on a regular basis," Ackart wrote. Llodra said she polled the victims' families and neighbors, and most support the plan to tear the house down. But not everyone likes the idea of leaving the space open. DeLoughy said she would rather the property be sold and a new home built on the property. "Leaving the property to nature would mean there is still a sense of darkness in our neighborhood," she said. "Love and light that a new family would bring would help heal some of the very deep wounds we are still tending to." 

22 января 2015, 02:12

Realty Income (O) Increases Dividend by 3% Following EPR - Analyst Blog

Delighting its shareholders, Realty Income Corporation (O) announced a hike of 3% in its monthly dividend rate to 18.9 cents from 18.34167 cents paid earlier.

Выбор редакции
22 января 2015, 00:33

3 Ways to Protect Your Business from Rent Increases

For many businesses, the start of a new year holds exciting opportunities as they look toward the future. But for companies that signed leases on or around January 1, the new year can also bring unexpected challenges in the form of rent increases that can cause real estate budgets to soar. While base rent increases should come as no surprise to tenants - they're spelled out in the lease - it's important for businesses to pay close attention to escalations in "additional rent," which typically includes operating expenses and real estate taxes. Sometimes referred to as Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges, these fees are allocated to tenants on a pro rata basis on top of the base rent they're required to pay each month. For example, if Company A leases 10,000 square feet in a building with 100,000 square feet of usable space, it may be responsible for 10 percent of the CAM charges. Landlords use this additional rent to pay for a variety of operating costs, including everything from security and landscaping services to snow and trash removal. But CAM charges can also include expenditures that should not be passed through to tenants, including but not limited to: capital expenditures designed to increase the long-term value of a property costs the landlord will eventually be reimbursed for through insurance or some other means costs of alterations or relocations of tenants within the building depreciation charges interest and principal payments of mortgages legal fees in connection with negotiating leases with other tenants in the building or in connection with the enforcing lease obligations of other tenants in the building real estate brokerage and leasing commissions marketing/advertising expenses incurred in connection with the leasing of the building fines assessed to the landlord for violating laws or ordinances  The list is a lengthy one, and a good lease will spell out which items should be included in a firm's rent to avoid landlord-tenant disputes. Unfortunately, not all landlords comply, and because they're the ones who are ultimately responsible for calculating tenant CAM charges, it's up to the tenant to ensure they are not overpaying. This process should begin before a lease is signed, and includes three key safeguards: Audit rights:When negotiating a lease, tenants should insist on an audit clause that gives them the right to review their landlord's expenses at least once per calendar year. The benefits of this are twofold: Tenants are not only able to investigate questionable charges, but their ability to do so discourages landlords from including them in the first place. Without giving themselves this option, tenants run the risk of having their landlord lump expenses into ambiguous categories like "other" or "miscellaneous" and may not be able to determine what they're actually paying for. CAM caps: Another way tenants can protect themselves against unpredictable rent hikes is negotiating first-year and ongoing CAM caps that dictate how much these fees can increase over the course of a lease. These can take on a variety of forms, such as: Gross leases: Unlike a net lease, in which CAM charges are assessed separately, gross leases allow tenants to pay a fixed - albeit higher - rental amount that is used to cover taxes and operating expenses. Year-over-base caps: Year-over-base caps allow CAM charges to increase by fixed percentages over the first year, or base year, expenses. These can be calculated on a cumulative or compounded basis. Year-over-year caps: With year-over-year caps, CAM charges increase by fixed percentages over the prior year's actual expenses. If expenses fall below the cap in any given year, the following year's cap is calculated using the lower amount, making this structure less appealing to landlords. Like year-over-base caps, these can be calculated on either a cumulative or compounded basis. Assignment/subletting provisions: While audit rights and CAM caps should help eliminate unexpected real estate costs, it never hurts for tenants to give themselves an "out" in case their ability to cover real estate expenses changes over the course of their lease. Having the option to assign or sublet their space to another business allows tenants to move to a more affordable location if their costs end up being higher than expected. Of course, the best way for tenants to ensure their lease includes all of the necessary CAM safeguards is to work with experienced real estate professionals like brokers and attorneys, who can help negotiate a lease and review the final document before it is signed. Doing so will save businesses time and money - not to mention headaches - in the long run and prevent them from becoming trapped in a space they're unable to afford. -- Frank Chalupa is president and co-founder of Amata Office Solutions, a Chicago-based real estate provider specializing in office solutions for companies requiring up to 10,000 square feet of office space. For more information, visit www.amataoffices.com.

22 января 2015, 00:28

Executive Order --- Enhancing Coordination of National Efforts in the Arctic

EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - ENHANCING COORDINATION OF NATIONAL EFFORTS IN THE ARCTIC By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to prepare the Nation for a changing Arctic and enhance coordination of national efforts in the Arctic, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Policy. The Arctic has critical long-term strategic, ecological, cultural, and economic value, and it is imperative that we continue to protect our national interests in the region, which include: national defense; sovereign rights and responsibilities; maritime safety; energy and economic benefits; environmental stewardship; promotion of science and research; and preservation of the rights, freedoms, and uses of the sea as reflected in international law. Over the past 60 years, climate change has caused the Alaskan Arctic to warm twice as rapidly as the rest of the United States, and will continue to transform the Arctic as its consequences grow more severe. Over the past several decades, higher atmospheric temperatures have led to a steady and dramatic reduction in Arctic sea ice, widespread glacier retreat, increasing coastal erosion, more acidic oceans, earlier spring snowmelt, thawing permafrost, drier landscapes, and more extensive insect outbreaks and wildfires, thus changing the accessibility and natural features of this remote region. As a global leader, the United States has the responsibility to strengthen international cooperation to mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change, understand more fully and manage more effectively the adverse effects of climate change, protect life and property, develop and manage resources responsibly, enhance the quality of life of Arctic inhabitants, and serve as stewards for valuable and vulnerable ecosystems. In doing so, we must rely on science-based decisionmaking and respect the value and utility of the traditional knowledge of Alaska Native peoples. As the United States assumes the Chairmanship of the Arctic Council, it is more important than ever that we have a coordinated national effort that takes advantage of our combined expertise and efforts in the Arctic region to promote our shared values and priorities. As the Arctic has changed, the number of Federal working groups created to address the growing strategic importance and accessibility of this critical region has increased. Although these groups have made significant progress and achieved important milestones, managing the broad range of interagency activity in the Arctic requires coordinated planning by the Federal Government, with input by partners and stakeholders, to facilitate Federal, State, local, and Alaska Native tribal government and similar Alaska Native organization, as well as private and nonprofit sector, efforts in the Arctic. Sec. 2. Arctic Executive Steering Committee. (a) Establishment. There is established an Arctic Executive Steering Committee (Steering Committee), which shall provide guidance to executive departments and agencies (agencies) and enhance coordination of Federal Arctic policies across agencies and offices, and, where applicable, with State, local, and Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, academic and research institutions, and the private and nonprofit sectors. (b) Membership. The Steering Committee shall consist of: (i) the heads, or their designees, of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Council on Environmental Quality, the Domestic Policy Council, and the National Security Council; (ii) the Executive Officer of the Steering Committee, who shall be designated by the Chair of the Steering Committee (Chair); and (iii) the Deputy Secretary or equivalent officer from the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, the Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Transportation, Energy, and Homeland Security; the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; the Environmental Protection Agency; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; the National Science Foundation; the Arctic Research Commission; and the Office of Management and Budget; the Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, or his or her designee; and other agencies or offices as determined appropriate by the Chair. (c) Administration. (i) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, or his or her designee, shall be the Chair of the Executive Steering Committee. The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, or his or her designee, shall be the Vice Chair. Under the leadership of the Chair, the Steering Committee will meet quarterly, or as appropriate, to shape priorities, establish strategic direction, oversee implementation, and ensure coordination of Federal activities in the Arctic. (ii) The Steering Committee shall coordinate with existing working groups established by Executive Order or statute. (iii) As appropriate, the Chair of the Steering Committee may establish subcommittees and working groups, consisting of representatives from relevant agencies, to focus on specific key issues and assist in carrying out its responsibilities. (iv) Agencies shall provide administrative support and additional resources, as appropriate, to support their participation in the Steering Committee to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. Each agency shall bear its own expenses for supporting its participation in the Steering Committee and associated working groups. (v) Each member of the Steering Committee shall provide the Executive Officer with a single point of contact for coordinating efforts with interagency partners, collaborating with State, local, and Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, and assisting in carrying out the functions and duties assigned by the Steering Committee. Sec. 3. Responsibilities of the Arctic Executive Steering Committee. The Steering Committee, in coordination with the heads of relevant agencies and under the direction of the Chair, shall: (a) provide guidance and coordinate efforts to implement the priorities, objectives, activities, and responsibilities identified in National Security Presidential Directive 66/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 25, Arctic Region Policy, the National Strategy for the Arctic Region and its Implementation Plan, and related agency plans; (b) provide guidance on prioritizing Federal activities, consistent with agency authorities, while the United States is Chair of the Arctic Council, including, where appropriate, recommendations for resources to use in carrying out those activities; and (c) establish a working group to provide a report to the Steering Committee by May 1, 2015, that: (i) identifies potential areas of overlap between and within agencies with respect to implementation of Arctic policy and strategic priorities and provides recommendations to increase coordination and reduce any duplication of effort, which may include ways to increase the effectiveness of existing groups; and (ii) provides recommendations to address any potential gaps in implementation. Sec. 4. Duties of the Executive Officer. The Executive Officer shall be responsible for facilitating interagency coordination efforts related to implementing the guidance and strategic priorities developed by the Steering Committee. The Executive Officer shall coordinate with the Chair and the Special Advisor on Arctic Science and Policy at the Department of State to provide regular reports to the Steering Committee on agency implementation and planning efforts for the Arctic region. Sec. 5. Engagement with the State of Alaska, Alaska Native Tribal Governments, as well as other United States Stakeholders. It is in the best interest of the Nation for the Federal Government to maximize transparency and promote collaboration where possible with the State of Alaska, Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, and local, private-sector, and nonprofit-sector stakeholders. To facilitate consultation and partnerships with the State of Alaska and Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, the Steering Committee shall: (a) develop a process to improve coordination and the sharing of information and knowledge among Federal, State, local, and Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, and private-sector and nonprofit-sector groups on Arctic issues; (b) establish a process to ensure tribal consultation and collaboration, consistent with my memorandum of November 5, 2009 (Tribal Consultation). This process shall ensure meaningful consultation and collaboration with Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations in the development of Federal policies that have Alaska Native implications, as applicable, and provide feedback and recommendations to the Steering Committee; (c) identify an appropriate Federal entity to be the point of contact for Arctic matters with the State of Alaska and with Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations to support collaboration and communication; and (d) invite members of State, local, and Alaska Native tribal governments and similar Alaska Native organizations, and academic and research institutions to consult on issues or participate in discussions, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE, January 21, 2015.

Выбор редакции
21 января 2015, 21:00

The Dysfunctional State of the Union

The President presented what he felt were solutions to many of the nation's problems in his State of the Union address last night. Webster defines a solution as "something that is used or done to deal with and end a problem." Based on this definition, the President presented some pleasant-sounding ideas that bordered on being pipedreams, but they did not meet the definition of a solution. This assessment doesn't just refer to the fact that there was no clear idea of how to pay for everything. It also encompasses the failure to think through the implications of some of the President's ideas. Take, for example, the idea of free community college for everyone who graduates high school with a 2.5 index or higher, which is the putative standard even though it wasn't mentioned last night. Dick Durbin, the far-left Senator from Illinois and Deputy Minority Leader, recently pointed out on the floor of Senate that many people graduate high school unable to read at a twelfth-grade level. Some of them will have a 2.5 index. Do these people really need college? What about a great trade school? What about an apprenticeship like the ones used routinely in small and midsize businesses in Germany that have made that country a paradigm of entrepreneurship? Let's lump the idea of free community college together with reduction in college debt. The idea is to help people enter the workplace without a crushing debt burden. If we are providing the money, should we have any say over the course of study? What is the connection between a free education and becoming productive? Do we equally subsidize budding accountants and people who want to be experts in Egyptology or French literature? Which degrees are necessary for society, and which are luxuries? What about childcare? At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, I think the idea of free childcare is great, but for how many children? I live in New Jersey, where a black state legislator (a white state senator couldn't have done it) pushed a cutoff for child welfare benefits after the second child. It had a considerable impact on the number of poor children born in the state. The President thinks he will raise every penny he needs by taxing the wealthy. We already know that what the President and Vice President have defined as wealthy has no connection to reality in places like Bergen County, New Jersey, where homes routinely cost four and five times as much as in the South, and property taxes are well into five figures. People earning $250,000 a year where I live limit the number of children they have. They will not benefit from any government program. They will often pay full freight for college educations. Just how much additional income tax will you expect them to pay for just how much childcare? Will free childcare loosen the constraint on having kids? How sympathetic do they need to be for people who give no thought to how to afford the children they have? If these arguments sound simplistic, they are no more so than the idea that college is free because one says it is. Let's face it. Whatever the Congressional Budget Office estimates is the cost of any of the long-term programs the President suggested, the overruns will be measured in multiples, not percentages. Soaking the more successful members of society will never provide sufficient tax money to offset what are sure to become progressively more bloated government giveaways. Our biggest problem is the lack of dialogue among the political factions in this country. The Democrats will want free college and amnesty for illegal immigrants. The Republicans will veto the idea of free college and want to deport every illegal immigrant. There are numerous solutions between those choices that will never get a proper airing. Take the college thing. Here are a few thoughts. Restrict free school to either people with a 3.3 index, or the top 20 percent of graduates from accredited high schools. Give everyone else a shot at a free trade school or apprenticeship. Help those people who simply need help with their debt loads through government grants. Make all these people give something back through national service, during which time they draw a decent salary. Promise the trade school people licenses when they finish their programs satisfactorily. For those who don't want or qualify for either college or trade school, provide workfare at a reasonable salary. Every problem can be approached with a view toward constructive solutions. By the way, that includes reassessing the incredible waste that is an ongoing problem at the Department of Defense, and which I have seen with my own eyes. "Free" is great, but we all know there is no "free," don't we?

21 января 2015, 20:58

Nordstrom to Open Relocated Ala Moana Center Store in 2016 - Analyst Blog

As recently revealed by a market source, apparel store chain Nordstrom Inc. (JWN) is now set to relocate to its newly renovated full-line store within the Ala Moana Center in Honolulu, HI, on Mar 11, 2016.

Выбор редакции
Выбор редакции
21 января 2015, 19:37

Your 3.8% Payout From Stocks

Measure your property by the earnings it generates.

21 января 2015, 19:33

States Fear The Supreme Court Will Eliminate This Key Anti-Discrimination Tool

This piece comes to us courtesy of Stateline. Stateline is a nonpartisan, nonprofit news service of the Pew Charitable Trusts that provides daily reporting and analysis on trends in state policy. Many cities and states fear the U.S. Supreme Court is about to strike down a provision of the 46-year-old Fair Housing Act they have frequently wielded as a weapon against racial discrimination. For decades, cities, states and fair housing advocates have used the law’s “disparate impact” rule to challenge zoning rules, lending practices and other housing-related policies. Under the rule, plaintiffs don’t have to prove that a particular policy or practice is intended to produce a discriminatory result; they only have to prove that it does.  Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, which the high court will hear today, is a challenge to the disparate impact provision. The case revolves around the awarding of federal tax credits to low-income housing developers in Dallas.  The facts are not in dispute: For many decades, the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) almost always gave the credits to private developers who planned to build affordable apartments in low-income, African-American neighborhoods. The result was that low-income people, many of them black, were segregated in distressed, high-crime areas.   In March 2012, a federal district judge ruled that TDHCA’s policies resulted in a disparate racial impact, thereby violating the Fair Housing Act. The judge directed the agency to alter its policy, which it has. In recent years, the TDHCA has awarded credits to developers to build affordable housing all over Dallas.  But former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Attorney General (and now Gov.) Greg Abbott, both Republicans, appealed the judge’s decision in an effort to have the Supreme Court invalidate the disparate impact provision. The court is expected to rule on the case by the end of its term in June. Texas officials, backed by a host of private interests, say disparate impact opens the door to lawsuits based on flimsy claims. The American Bankers Association filed a brief supporting Texas, as did the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Financial Services Roundtable and many others. They argue that the Fair Housing Act was meant to root out intentional discrimination, not adjudicate hazy allegations based on a given policy’s outcome—one that might be beyond officials’ control anyway. “Equally troubling is the all-too-common agency practice of defining disparate impact liability in terms that are vague and indeterminate,” Texas argues in its brief. “It nevertheless gives agency administrators carte blanche to decide whether an asserted interest is ‘substantial’ enough to justify a racially disproportionate impact.” Myron Orfield, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who previewed the case for the website SCOTUSblog, said the case is “as important as the affirmative action cases and the school integration case.” The Civil Rights Act and other laws also allow disparate impact challenges, but the case before the court today deals only with the Fair Housing Act and wouldn’t affect other laws. “People are realizing more and more that these civil rights laws protect not only nonwhite people, but they protect everybody,” Orfield said, pointing out that the Fair Housing Act prohibits a wide range of potentially discriminatory policies, from so-called “blockbusting” (encouraging white property owners in a particular neighborhood to sell their houses at a loss by suggesting that racial minorities are moving in) to charging different rates to different people based on religion, background or disability. A Long Battle For more than a half century, cities, states and the federal government have been combatting housing segregation and discrimination. In the last two decades, segregation has declined in many major metro areas around the U.S., according to an analysis from the Population Studies Center at the University of Michigan. Learn About Tableau More than two dozen cities and states have stepped in to defend the disparate impact rule. “Without disparate impact claims, States and others will be left with fewer critical tools to combat the kinds of systemic discrimination that the (Fair Housing Act) was intended to address,” said the brief filed by 17 states, including Massachusetts, New York, Arizona, North Carolina and Utah. “The result is of significant concern to States.” They continued: “The effects of racial segregation and concentrated poverty are far-reaching and long-lasting, and the costs to state and local governments are significant. Without a comprehensive set of tools to combat these problems, the inequities will persist and, in some circumstances, worsen.” Nearly two dozen cities voiced similar concerns in a separate brief. The Obama administration also is backing the disparate impact rule, as are a group of current and former members of Congress who argue that the disparate impact rule was always intended to be a part of the Fair Housing Act and should be upheld as a crucial discrimination-fighting tool. Broader Concerns The case could turn on either a technical reading of the Fair Housing Act, or more broadly on the justices’ willingness to give leeway to officials seeking to root out discrimination. Advocates are most worried about the justices taking a broad approach, given the court’s recent rulings chipping away at affirmative action policies and the Voting Rights Act. Though he concedes he may be politically naive, Orfield said he isn’t worried. He pointed out that the disparate impact doctrine has been around for decades, and has its roots in the Nixon administration. He questioned whether a moderate like Justice Anthony Kennedy — the crucial swing vote on the court — would move to strike it down. “It’s not radical. It’s a very sensible, necessary tool,” he said.