Filed Date: May 31, 2023
Closed Date: July 23, 2025
Clearinghouse coding complete
On May 31, 2023, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice filed this lawsuit in the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against ESSA Bank & Trust. The complaint claimed that ESSA’s policies and practices violated the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”) by redlining majority-Black and Hispanic communities and discouraging prospective applicants from applying for credit on the basis of race and national origin. The DOJ requested that the Court grant declaratory and injunctive relief, monetary damages, and civil penalties available under the FHA and ECOA. Included in the Complaint, the DOJ submitted a proposed Consent Order for approval by the Court, which was signed by both parties prior to filing.
In July 2021, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) concluded that there was reason to believe that ESSA engaged in illegal credit discrimination on the basis of race. The FDIC referred the matter to the US Attorney General on June 6, 2022. Then, on August 15, 2022, the US DOJ informed ESSA that it had initiated an investigation into lending discrimination by the bank. The findings from the investigation brought about this lawsuit.
On June 9, 2023, Judge Michael M. Maylson approved the Consent Order that was attached to the Complaint. The Consent Order enjoined ESSA from further engaging in discriminatory lending practices on the basis of race, color, or national origin and required that ESSA conduct a detailed assessment of its fair lending program and submit a Report and Compliance Plan to the DOJ. The Order provided that ESSA must provide annual training to all employees, submit a Community Credit Needs Assessment for majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts within its lending area, and hire addition mortgage loan officers and a full-time Community Development Officer with the primary responsibility of overseeing the development of the Bank’s lending in majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts. The Consent Order required that ESSA invest a minimum of $2.92 million in a loan subsidy fund to increase credit for home mortgage loans, home improvement loans, and home refinance loans for consumers applying for loans in majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts and that ESSA spend at least $250,000 over the term of this Consent Order on advertising, outreach, consumer financial education, and credit counseling focused on majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts. The lawsuit was marked as closed when the Order was signed, but requirements of the Consent Order would remain in effect for five years.
The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the order for two years until June 9, 2025, although the decree’s obligations would remain in effect for five years.
After the second Trump Administration began, DOJ reviewed existing decrees with a view to ending any that did not align with the new administration's priorities. On June 6, 2025, shortly before the court’s jurisdictional term was set to expire, the DOJ filed an unopposed motion to terminate the Consent Order and dismiss the case with prejudice, asserting that ESSA had fully disbursed the $2.92 million fund, substantially complied with all injunctive terms, and achieved the order’s remedial goals.
On June 9, 2025, three fair-housing organizations—the Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, POWER Interfaith, and the National Fair Housing Alliance—filed a motion for leave to submit an amicus brief opposing termination, arguing that the decree was expressly designed for a five-year term and that ending it early would undermine ongoing relief. On June 17, 2025, Judge Baylson granted the motion for leave, directed the amici’s brief to be docketed, and ordered the parties to respond within 30 days.
The court held oral argument on July 21, 2025, and on July 23, 2025, Judge Baylson denied the government’s motion. In a written Memorandum and Order, he ruled that the Consent Order remains in effect, reasoning that ESSA’s completion of the subsidy fund did not satisfy all continuing obligations, that the decree expressly contemplated five years of remedial work, and that early termination was neither equitable nor justified under Rule 60(b)(5). The court reaffirmed that all terms of the Consent Order would continue to bind the parties until June 9, 2028, even though the case remained administratively closed.
Summary Authors
Marisa London (4/22/2025)
Jack Buckfire (11/5/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67454392/parties/united-states-v-essa-bank-trust/
Baylson, Michael M. (Pennsylvania)
DAVID, GREGORY B. (Pennsylvania)
Hussain, Varda (Pennsylvania)
COFFINA, SCOTT A. (Pennsylvania)
Mania, Olivia (Pennsylvania)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67454392/united-states-v-essa-bank-trust/
Last updated Nov. 4, 2025, 7:26 p.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Reversing Course on Existing Litigation
Key Dates
Filing Date: May 31, 2023
Closing Date: July 23, 2025
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
United States Attorney General
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
ESSA Bank & Trust (Stroudsburg, Monroe), Private Entity/Person
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. § 1691
Fair Housing Act/Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.
Other Dockets:
Eastern District of Pennsylvania 2:23-cv-02065
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Comply with advertising/recruiting requirements
Provide antidiscrimination training
Amount Defendant Pays: $3,170,000
Order Duration: 2023 - 2028
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Area:
Discrimination Basis:
National origin discrimination
Affected National Origin/Ethnicity(s):
Affected Race(s):