Judge temporarily stays ruling in eviction moratorium case

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge has temporarily stayed an order that found the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its authority when it imposed a federal eviction moratorium to help stop the spread of the coronavirus.

The stay, issued late Wednesday by a federal judge in Washington, came after the Justice Department filed an emergency appeal in the case. The administrative stay means there will be no immediate impact on the ban, which was extended in March to go through the end of June.

The judge said issuing the stay was not based on the merits of the Justice Department's argument but instead is meant to give the court time to consider the motion and any potential opposition.

Opponents of the moratorium, including the National Association of Realtors, welcomed the judge's initial ruling and said the solution was rental assistance, not a ban on evictions.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-temporarily-stays-ruling-in-eviction-moratorium-case/ar-BB1gqrz3?li=BBnb7Kz

[samnsara]

1. our judges seem to come thru for democracy..

[rsdsharp]

2. You know this was the same judge that issued the original ruling, right?

[WHITT]

3. One Little Problem For Her

Congress extended the moratorium within recent legislation, so it's not just an administrative ruling from the CDC.

No surprise who appointed the unqualified RightWing mushbrain to the bench.

[ripcord]

4. The extension Congress passed has expired

The current eviction moratorium was issued by the CDC.

[WHITT]

6. Congress Encompassed The Current CDC Moratorium

[FBaggins]

7. Congress' action expired last July

The current CDC moratorium was claimed to be based on Congress' prior action granting the director broad powers in a pandemic. But this ruling (along with a number of prior ones), says that isn't within the powers Congress granted (and by some readings, powers that it can grant).

Congress more recently provided funds aimed at forestalling evictions, but not by policy... by giving people funds to pay those obligations.

[WHITT]

10. Wrong Moratorium

[FBaggins]

11. You might try actually backing up the claim?

Where did Congress do what you claim?

Why is the Biden administration appealing the ruling if Congress made the ruling irrelevant?

[WHITT]

12. I Intended To Post The Legislative Language

but turns out you're correct. It was in the House bill, and the Speaker had publicly talked about it, and the last I knew it remained there, but the Senate swapped it out for some $20+ billion in rental assistance. Sounds like yet another Manchin special.

As to an appeal, that would happen either way, as you can't just allow a bone-headed ruling to stand unchallenged.

[ananda]

5. Thank goodness!

Yay

[DownriverDem]

8. Okay

So what happens when all these folks are out on the street and there are a ton of empty houses & apartments? Who wins?

[TexasBushwhacker]

13. That's what I want to know too

While I agree that rental assistance should be available as well, everyone has not been impacted the same amount at the same time. It can take time (weeks if not months) to apply and qualify for assistance.

But I do wonder who they think will occupy the vacant apartments. Anyone who can possibly afford to buy a home is doing so because of low interest rates. Demand for apartments and other rentals should be going down, not up, but it certainly hasn't caused rents to go down where I live. All newly constructed apartments are "luxury" properties wanting $1800 for a 1 BR. The older apartments slap a coat of paint on them and change their name so they can jack the rent up 30%. I don't get it.

[MichMan]

9. Need to have a moratorium on state and local taxes to go along with it