A mixed-bag ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday gives ammunition to both sides in litigation between cities and banks under the Fair Housing Act over the impact of predatory lending practices on local communities.

Civil rights and civil liberties groups applauded the court's 5-3 decision affirming that Miami has standing to claim in court that it was harmed by the discriminatory lending practices of banks targeting minority borrowers. But banks were relieved that on a second issue, the court unanimously agreed that Miami must meet a high standard of proof to establish that the banks' actions caused the city's injuries.

The high court vacated and remanded the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which had ruled in favor of Miami on the standing issue and also on “proximate cause,” finding that all of the harms Miami suffered, such as lower property tax revenue and higher costs of city services, were foreseeable. The Supreme Court agreed that foreseeability was not enough to sustain a claim for damages.