Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback.
Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.
The findings were stark. In one investigation, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development concluded that a Texas state agency had steered $1 billion in disaster mitigation money away from Houston and nearby communities of color after Hurricane Harvey inundated the region in 2017. In another investigation, HUD found that a homeowners association outside of Dallas had created rules to kick poor Black people out of their neighborhood.
The episodes amounted to egregious violations of civil rights laws, officials at the housing agency believed — enough to warrant litigation against the alleged culprits. That, at least, was the view during the presidency of Joe Biden. After the Trump administration took over, HUD quietly took steps that will likely kill both cases, according to three officials familiar with the matter.
Advertisement
Those steps were extremely unusual. Current and former HUD officials said they could not recall the housing agency ever pulling back cases of this magnitude in which the agency had found evidence of discrimination. That leaves the yearslong, high-profile investigations in a state of limbo, with no likely path for the government to advance them, current and former officials said. As a result, the alleged perpetrators of the discrimination could face no government penalties, and the alleged victims could receive no compensation.
“I just think that’s a doggone shame,” said Doris Brown, a Houston resident and a co-founder of a community group that, together with a housing nonprofit, filed the Harvey complaint. Brown saw 3 feet of water flood her home in a predominantly Black neighborhood that still shows damage from the storm. “We might’ve been able to get some more money to help the people that are still suffering,” she said.
On Jan. 15, HUD referred the Houston case to the Department of Justice, a necessary step to a federal lawsuit after the housing agency finds evidence of discrimination. Less than a month later, on Feb. 13, the agency rescinded its referral without public explanation. HUD did the same with the Dallas case not long after.
The development has alarmed some about a rollback of civil rights enforcement at the agency under President Donald Trump and HUD Secretary Scott Turner, who is from Texas. “The new administration is systematically dismantling the fair housing enforcement and education system,” said Sara Pratt, a former HUD official and an attorney for complainants in both Texas cases. “The message is: The federal government no longer takes housing discrimination seriously.”
HUD spokesperson Kasey Lovett disagreed, saying there was precedent for the rescinded referrals, which were done to gather more facts and scrutinize the investigations. “We’re taking a fresh look at Biden Administration policies, regulations, and cases. These cases are no exception,” Lovett said in a statement. “HUD will uphold the Fair Housing Act and the Civil Rights Act as the department is strongly and wholeheartedly opposed to housing discrimination.”
Advertisement
The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.
The Harvey case concerns a portion of a $4.3 billion grant that HUD gave to Texas after the hurricane inundated low-lying coastal areas, killing at least 89 people and causing more than $100 billion in damage. The money was meant to fund better drainage, flood control systems and other storm mitigation measures.
HUD sent the money to a state agency called the Texas General Land Office, which awarded the first $1 billion in funding to communities affected by Harvey through a grant competition. But the state agency excluded Houston and many of the most exposed coastal areas from eligibility for half of that money, according to HUD’s investigation. And, for the other half, it created award criteria that benefited rural areas at the expense of more populous applicants like Houston.
The result: Of that initial $1 billion, Houston — where nearly half of all homes were damaged by the hurricane — received nothing. Neither did Harris County, where Houston is located, or other coastal areas with large minority populations. Instead, the Texas agency, according to HUD, awarded a disproportionate amount of the aid to more rural, white areas that had suffered less damage in the hurricane. After an outcry, GLO asked HUD a few days later to send $750 million to Harris County, but HUD found that allocation still fell far short of the county’s mitigation needs. And none of that money went directly to Houston.
HUD launched an investigation into the competition in 2021, ultimately finding that GLO had discriminated on the basis of race and national origin, thereby violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and possibly the Fair Housing Act as well.
Advertisement
“GLO knowingly developed and operated a competition for the purpose of allocating funds to mitigate storm and flood risk that steered money away from urban Black and Hispanic communities that had the highest storm and flood risk into Whiter, more rural areas with less risk,” the agency wrote. “Despite awareness that its course of action would result in disparate harm for Black and Hispanic individuals, GLO still knowingly and disparately denied these communities critical mitigation funding.”
GLO has consistently disputed the allegations. It contends that many people of color benefited from its allocations. The Texas agency has also argued that the evidence in the case was weak, citing the fact that, in 2023, the Justice Department returned the case to HUD. At the time, the DOJ said it wanted HUD to investigate further. The housing agency then spent more than a year digging deeper into the facts and assembling more evidence before making its short-lived referral in January.
Asked about the rescinded referral, GLO spokesperson Brittany Eck told ProPublica: “Liberal political appointees and advocates spent years spinning false narratives without the facts to build a case. Four years of sensationalized, clickbait rhetoric without evidence is long enough.”
The other HUD case involved Providence Village, a largely white community north of Dallas of around 9,000 people. Purported concerns about crime and property values led the Providence Homeowners Association to adopt a rule in 2022 prohibiting property owners from renting to holders of Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, through which HUD subsidizes the housing costs of poor, elderly and disabled people. There were at least 157 households in Providence Village supported by vouchers, nearly all of them Black families. After the HOA action, some of them began leaving.
The rule attracted national attention, leading the Texas Legislature to prohibit HOAs from banning Section 8 tenants. Undeterred, the Providence HOA adopted amended rules in 2024 that placed restrictions on rental properties, which HUD found would have a similar effect as the previous ban.
Advertisement
Throughout the HOA’s efforts, people peppered community social media groups with racist vitriol about voucher holders, describing them as “wild animals,” “ghetto poverty crime ridden mentality people” and “lazy entitled leeching TR@SH.” One person wrote that “they might just leave in a coroner’s wagon.”
The discord attracted a white nationalist group, which twice protested just outside Providence Village. “The federal government views safe White communities as a problem,” flyers distributed by the group read. “The Section 8 Housing Voucher is a tool used to bring diversity to these neighborhoods.”
In January, HUD formally accused the HOA, its board president, a property management company and one of its property managers of violating the Fair Housing Act. The respondents have disputed the allegation. The HOA has argued its rules were meant to protect property values, support well-maintained homes and address crime concerns. The property management company, FirstService Residential Texas, said it was not responsible for the actions of the HOA.
The HOA and FirstService did not respond to requests for comment. The property manager declined to comment. Mitch Little, a lawyer for the HOA board president, said: “HUD didn’t pursue this case because there’s nothing to pursue. The claims are baseless and unsubstantiated.”
The Providence Village and Houston cases stretched on for years. All it took was two terse emails to undo them. “HUD’s Office of General Counsel withdrew the referral of the above-captioned case to the Department of Justice,” HUD wrote to Pratt this month regarding one of the cases. “We have no further information at this time.” That was the entirety of the message; neither email explained the reasoning behind the decisions.
Advertisement
The cases may have fallen victim to a broader roll-back of civil rights enforcement at the Justice Department, where memos circulated in January ordering a freeze of civil rights cases and investigations.
The development is the latest sign that the Trump administration may dramatically curtail HUD’s housing discrimination work. The agency canceled 78 grants to local fair housing groups last month, sparking a lawsuit by some of them. HUD justified the cancellations by saying each grant “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.” (Pratt’s firm, Relman Colfax, is representing the plaintiffs in that suit.) And projections circulating within HUD last month indicated the agency’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity could see its staff cut by 76% under the new administration.
If HUD does not pursue the cases, the complainants could file their own lawsuits. But they may not soon forget the government’s about-face on the issue. “If there is a major flood in Houston, which there almost certainly will be, and people die, and homes get destroyed, the people who made this decision are in large part responsible,” said Ben Hirsch, a member of one of the groups that brought the Harvey complaint. “People will die because of this.”
Disclosure: Texas General Land Office has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
We can’t wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas’ breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Pamela Maldonado is a sports betting analyst for ESPN.
No. 3 Texas A&M walks into Austin with everything still on the table, while No. 17 Texas is clinging to the final thread of a postseason dream that’s been unraveling since the team was ranked preseason No. 1 for the first time in their history.
One side is chasing a conference title, and the other is trying to keep its season from folding in its own backyard. The matchup has urgency, consequence and an energy that guarantees excitement, twists and everything in between, but the reasons why sit beneath the surface.
Saddle up … Aggies versus Longhorns is about who can handle the ride.
All odds by ESPN BET
No. 3 Texas A&M Aggies at No. 17 Texas Longhorns Friday, 7:30 p.m. ET, ABC
Line: Texas A&M -2.5 Money line: Texas A&M (-120), Texas (Even) Over/Under: 51.5 (O -110, U -110)
Advertisement
Texas: a team that lives in between potential and production
This Texas team can be so much more and maybe in 2026 they can be. They have the quarterback talent, the receiver room and the pass-rush ceiling, and the solid markers to build a base that can go toe to toe with any team in the country.
Unfortunately, we’ve been seeing the same story unfold since the start of the season, even a continuation of last year. Texas moves through games with volatility instead of a steady foundation. When Arch Manning has time, the Longhorns can hit explosives in a way that genuinely scares opponents. He’s thrown 23 touchdowns and is throwing 8.1 yards per pass, which shows that the ability is there, the firepower is there.
The catch is how often the Longhorns offense is forced into that mode. The run game is nearly non-existent, hovering near 3.7 yards per carry, outside of the top 100 in the country, which means they aren’t consistently living in second-and-4 or even third and manageable. This can make such a difference. Instead, we see Texas always one negative play away from giving possessions back. It means Manning is having to manufacture answers to predicaments that shouldn’t exist. The offense isn’t giving him the framework, so he’s sticking it together on the fly.
On the fly doesn’t work in competitive football unless you’re Johnny Manziel.
Defensively, the effort is there and the pressure numbers are real, generating over 200 pressures, but the coverage isn’t airtight enough to hide the moments where the pass rush doesn’t immediately hit.
Advertisement
When Texas wins, the question is always, “is Texas good?” And when they lose, it’s always “oh, right, that’s more like it.” The Longhorns are talented, explosive, and competitive, but Texas is also dependent on conditions, timing, rhythm, and quarterback brilliance. That’s the space they operate in and why their path to winning requires chaos, which means a lot of things have to go right, far more than it should.
Texas A&M: a team with a fully formed identity and multiple ways to win
The Aggies are built with an offense that doesn’t lean on one player or one phase, it’s the product of balance. Texas A&M has a run game that actually shifts the way defenses behave, averaging 5 yards per carry, top 30 in the FBS, giving them a kind of control most teams never find. The Aggies playcalling can stay patient. It means comebacks can happen, it means Marcel Reed can operate a system designed for efficiency, not heroism.
Reed’s 9.0 yards per pass is happening because the offense is forcing defenses into conflict on every snap. The scoring outputs back it up: 54 total touchdowns on the season is a clear sign that the Aggies can finish drives and don’t waste possessions. The red zone efficiency tells the same story. A&M plays football with the understanding that momentum is built, stacked and maintained.
Defensively, tackling has been a weak point but it hasn’t derailed their ability to dictate games or control pace. The Aggies play inside their identity every week, an advantage that shows up when the games get tight.
Advertisement
Betting consideration: Texas A&M -2.5
The Aggies are the more complete team so this is a wager that backs up the side that holds up under pressure. In KC Concepcion and Mario Craver, they have a WR duo that is a matchup nightmare for a Texas secondary that sits out of the top 50 in coverage grade, and has been vulnerable anytime the pass rush doesn’t close.
Concepcion’s ability to separate underneath and Craver’s vertical range stretch the defense horizontally and vertically at the same time, forcing Texas into coverage trade-offs they haven’t solved all year.
Then there’s the Aggies defense, which plays aggressively with over 200 pressures on the season, but aren’t reckless. They’ll heat up Manning without exposing themselves behind it. That kind of balance matters against a Texas offense that’s built on volatility. Texas needs pop-offs to survive, which becomes harder when the opposing front dictates and the back end holds up well enough to avoid collapse.
If the Aggies play balanced and are able to attack the exact weak points Texas can’t hide, then laying a short number on the road is justified, and possibly even a few points short.
Betting trends
Courtesy of ESPN Research
Texas is 0-4 ATS against AP Top-5 teams since the start of last season, worst in FBS.
The Aggies are 7-15 ATS as a favorite since the start of last season, T-worst among Power 4 schools with UGA (min. 20 games).
Texas is 5-1-1 ATS as a home underdog over the last 10 years, T-best in FBS with Notre Dame/App State (min. 5 games).
Texas A&M is 3-7-2 ATS when the spread is between a FG (+3 to -3) since 2022, worst among power conference teams (min. 10 games as Power 4 team in span).
Texas Tech linebacker Jacob Rodriguez and Texas A&M defensive end Cashius Howell were named finalists for the Bednarik Award, which is presented annually to college football’s defensive player of the year.
Ohio State safety Caleb Downs was the third finalist.
Rodriguez and Howell have spearheaded their respective teams’ push for a conference title and a College Football Playoff bid. Both players are in a position to compete in the Big 12 and SEC Championships, respectively, with a win on Saturday.
Howell has manned the defensive line for one of the three remaining undefeated FBS teams, contributing an SEC-leading 11.5 sacks. He is a four-time SEC defensive lineman of the week and leads all defensive ends with six pass breakups.
Advertisement
Sports Roundup
Get the latest D-FW sports news, analysis and opinion delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, Kevin Sherrington’s A La Carte.
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Related
Texas A&M’s defense ranks first nationally in 3rd down defense and second in FBS with 39.0 sacks.
Advertisement
Rodriguez has aided Texas Tech in its best start since 2008 and its highest-ranked scoring defense in over a decade.
Although he has contributed only a sack to the nation’s leader in team sacks, the senior inside linebacker leads the country with seven forced fumbles. He also has four interceptions.
Rodriguez has taken over social media over the past four weeks, earning the Heisman fan vote in four consecutive weeks.
Rodriguez and Howell are also finalists for the Bronko Nagurski Trophy and Lombardi Award.
The Bednarik Award winner will be announced as part of the ESPN’s college football awards show, which will be broadcast live on ESPN on Friday, Dec. 12.
Advertisement
Texas A&M QB Marcel Reed named finalist for Davey O’Brien Award
Texas Tech’s Joey McGuire named Region 4 AFCA Coach of the Year
Find more Texas A&M coverage from The Dallas Morning News here.
Find more Texas Tech coverage from The Dallas Morning News here.
S.E. Jenkins is a digital content producer for CBS Texas. She has also been a Digital Content Producer in Tallahassee and Myrtle Beach. S.E. graduated with journalism degrees from Texas State University, Aarhus Universitet and City, University of London.
Advertisement
Read Full Bio
/ CBS Texas
Advertisement
A 17-year-old has been charged in the shooting of a North Texas DoorDash delivery driver late last month, Mesquite police said.
Investigators discovered that just before 12:30 a.m. on Oct. 27, the driver was making a delivery to a home in the 2000 block of Birch Bend when a man wearing dark clothing approached and started shooting at him.
The suspect, later identified as 17-year-old Ledavion Sockwell, fled the area.
Advertisement
Responding officers found the delivery driver had been shot multiple times and rendered aid until fire department personnel arrived and took the driver to the hospital. The delivery driver survived the shooting.
Late Monday afternoon, the Mesquite Police Department Major Crimes Unit and Mesquite Tactical Unit executed a search and arrest warrant for Sockwell in the 1400 block of Regent St. He was taken into custody without incident.