Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-04-2021, 10:52 AM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,513,185 times
Reputation: 10096

Advertisements

The question here is do we still recognize property rights, contract obligations and economic reality for business owners? Or are we going full fascist, with federal government bureaucrats at the CDC controlling and directing the means of production?

Quote:
Landlord group asks Supreme Court to strike down eviction freeze

A group of landlords on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to end a nationwide freeze on evictions so that property owners can proceed with removing financially distressed renters from their homes. The emergency request comes a day after a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., rebuffed the group's bid to nullify the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) eviction moratorium.

Led by the Alabama Association of Realtors, the group asked Chief Justice John Roberts to reinstate a lower court ruling that found public health officials had overstepped their authority in halting evictions across the U.S. "Landlords have been losing over $13 billion every month under the moratorium, and the total effect of the CDC's overreach may reach up to $200 billion if it remains in effect for a year," read the brief filed to Roberts, who handles emergency requests related to D.C.-based litigation.

The CDC order, which is set to expire at the end of June, aims to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus by helping cash-strapped tenants remain in their homes. Renters seeking protection must declare under penalty of perjury that they would face overcrowded conditions if evicted and that they have made their best effort to pay rent.

The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
If someone wants to make the case for a short term emergency, certainly that argument is long gone now, unless the emergency is going to be a permanent one.

Please note that the DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment. They are going to have to pick a side here. Are they going to do that based on the law, which is their duty, or on the basis of the partisan howls of the corporate media-led leftist mob? We will see.

I do not want to see anyone ever evicted from their home. But if someone owns a property, they have to be able to manage it within the law and with a mind towards being economically responsible for the assets that they are invested in. To demand that property owners across the country be required to provide free rent to millions of people - indefinitely - is as unsustainable as it is irresponsible.

This cannot go on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2021, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Annandale, VA
6,963 posts, read 2,696,549 times
Reputation: 7137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
The question here is do we still recognize property rights, contract obligations and economic reality for business owners? Or are we going full fascist, with federal government bureaucrats at the CDC controlling and directing the means of production?



If someone wants to make the case for a short term emergency, certainly that argument is long gone now, unless the emergency is going to be a permanent one.

Please note that the DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment. They are going to have to pick a side here. Are they going to do that based on the law, which is their duty, or on the basis of the partisan howls of the corporate media-led leftist mob? We will see.

I do not want to see anyone ever evicted from their home. But if someone owns a property, they have to be able to manage it within the law and with a mind towards being economically responsible for the assets that they are invested in. To demand that property owners across the country be required to provide free rent to millions of people - indefinitely - is as unsustainable as it is irresponsible.

This cannot go on.
If people can "afford" to thumb their noses at their previous job because it doesn't pay at least $15/hour, they afford to pay they rent or be evicted.

I also hope that the landlords can sue for back rent not paid during the lockdown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2021, 01:15 PM
 
17,874 posts, read 15,925,121 times
Reputation: 11659
In this liberal SJW, racial equality, antifa, BLM day and age, you can forget about it. People of color and minority will no longer have to pay for anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2021, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Michigan
5,645 posts, read 6,206,522 times
Reputation: 8218
I am 100% in favor of ending the moratorium at this point but this group needs to go to District Court. There is no baisis for a Supreme Court justice to make a ruling here unless there's a lower court order out there on this of which I am unaware. Emergency orders are uncommon anyway and where they are granted they relate to lower court decisions such as a stay of a Circuit Court decision. If there is no lower court order this is likely an attempt at publicity for the cause.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2021, 01:32 PM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,513,185 times
Reputation: 10096
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrowGirl View Post
I am 100% in favor of ending the moratorium at this point but this group needs to go to District Court. There is no baisis for a Supreme Court justice to make a ruling here unless there's a lower court order out there on this of which I am unaware. Emergency orders are uncommon anyway and where they are granted they relate to lower court decisions such as a stay of a Circuit Court decision. If there is no lower court order this is likely an attempt at publicity for the cause.
As discussed in the article linked in the OP, this case was originally filed in district court and the district court agreed with the landlords. That case was appealed and overturned by the appeals court. So the next stop is SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2021, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Michigan
5,645 posts, read 6,206,522 times
Reputation: 8218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
As discussed in the article linked in the OP, this case was originally filed in district court and the district court agreed with the landlords. That case was appealed and overturned by the appeals court. So the next stop is SCOTUS.
OK got it - that makes more sense. Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top