You don’t have to have racist intents to execute a policy that enforces racism. Unfortunately when we talk about systems of society within humans, individual human intentions begin to dissipate.

>If, let's say, bank has a policy that you need 20% down payment to qualify for a mortgage, and let's say this has a differential impact on some group, how do you go about addressing this?

You look to see why that's the case, and if it happens to be that those people have been recently (relative to society) emancipated slaves who've barely had 4 generations in a society that still systemically kills them via law enforcement, then you do whatever you can to change that.

We don't need to chose to address every differential impact, only the ones that we see as being bad, or particularly worthy of attention, for example the systematic exclusion of black people from the normal financial tools that allow us to build wealth.

I agree with this goal, but I don't see systemic exclusion in this article because the article didn't bother to do any investigation to understand where these policies came from. I keep reiterating this, but debt is an incredibly dangerous financial tool and you have to take extra care in differentiating someone being denied a loan because the objective risk profile is high vs being denied a loan because the bank is following racist policies.