Poli Alert Political & Civics
Related Articles
A federal judge has denied a request by a group of landlords to block the CDC’s recently reinstated eviction moratorium. U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich ruled that despite her belief the CDC does not have the authority to enact the ban, her hands were tied based on a previous ruling from an appeals court.
“The Supreme Court did not issue a controlling opinion in this case, and circuit precedent provides that the votes of dissenting Justices may not be combined with that of a concurring Justice to create binding law,” the judge wrote.
She said that it is up to the appellate court to decide if the moratorium should be blocked.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated and extended the moratorium through October 3, 2021.
The CDC pushed the order to protect tenants that are behind on rent from being evicted. The agency says that evicting renters behind in rent would have increased the spread of COVID-19.
“We are pleased that the district court left the moratorium in place, though we are aware that further proceedings in this case are likely,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court blocked a provision of New York’s eviction moratorium that allows tenants to “self attest” that they’ve experienced hardship because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Landlords could not challenge the tenants, and that was a violation of landlords’ rights.
“This scheme violates the court’s longstanding teaching that ordinarily ‘no man can be a judge in his own case,” the majority opinion reads.
Under the federal moratorium, a renter must give a declaration indicating that they tried to obtain available government assistance, earned less than $99,000 in 2020, and that eviction would cause them to be homeless.
Judge Friedrich included a footnote in the opinion explaining why she would have blocked the moratorium. It says that President Biden’s administration did not fully explain why the order would be beneficial, how many evictions it will prevent, and it did not mention compounding costs and residual benefits.
