The Constitutionality of CDC's Eviction Moratorium

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

The CDC's order to temporary halt residential evictions originates from Section 4024 under Public Law 116-136 (a.k.a. CARES Act of 2020), and has been extended numerous times since the law was enacted. The current order is set to expire on June 30, 2021.

Under Section 4024 of the CARES Act Congress is assuming they have complete control over every residence that as a federally-backed mortgage loan, as well as any residence involved in federal programs. Such as Section 41441(a) of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and Section 542 of the Housing Act of 1949.

Just to be crystal clear, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the CDC. They are merely the federal agency responsible for implementing the law enacted by Congress. This thread is about the constitutionality of the Section 4024 under Public Law 116-136.

Unfortunately, Congress is not required to cite the portion of the US Constitution that gives them the authority to enact such laws, so we are left trying to guess the authority they used. Every law Congress enacts must be a power that the US Constitution has specifically granted to the federal government. So the question becomes, under which authority of the US Constitution did Congress enact this law?

Based upon the definitions under Section 4024 under Public Law 116-136 it would appear that Congress was attempting to draw a nexus between federal programs and their ability to assert control over the properties. The only properties covered under this law are those that:


Federally-backed mortgages does make the property federal property to do with as they see fit. Nor does participating in any federally-covered housing program put the property under federal control. Furthermore, there is no nexus with the Commerce Clause since Congress' authority only extends to interstate and international commerce. So unless it is a mobile home that has crossed a State or national border, Congress has no authority over any private property within any State except for what the Fifth Amendment allows.

If the law is determined to be unconstitutional the CDC order will cease to exist, and every resident who benefited from this illegal temporary eviction moratorium order will lose a lot more than just their homes. They will be held financially accountable to the leaseholder for every penny, plus interest, that they didn't pay.

Earlier in May the DC District Court struct down the CDC mortgage moratorium.

Federal Judge Strikes Down CDC Moratorium On Evictions

A federal judge in Washington D.C. struck down a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention policy that halted landlords from evicting tenants.

thefederalist.com

However, the DOJ appealed the decision and the CDC mortgage moratorium was reinstated until the end of June.

Temporary Stay Leaves CDC Eviction Moratorium in Effect after Judge Rules it Unconstitutional

A federal district court judge in Washington, DC, ruled on May 5 that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did not have the authority to issue a federal moratorium on evictions for nonpayment of rent. Within hours of the decision, the U.S.

nlihc.org

This is very unconstitutional ! This is the same thing as when the Founding Fathers made sure to Separate "The Church" and State !
The CDC has no authority to dictate US Policy, and they were not elected by the people! This is an encroachment if Big Government !

Just think, what if the CDC said "If you live by or see a homeless person you must house them and keep them healthy" ....
They are taking away your Liberty and Freedom!

 

[Glitch]

This is very unconstitutional ! This is the same thing as when the Founding Fathers made sure to Separate "The Church" and State !
The CDC has no authority to dictate US Policy, and they were not elected by the people! This is an encroachment if Big Government !

Just think, what if the CDC said "If you live by or see a homeless person you must house them and keep them healthy" ....
They are taking away your Liberty and Freedom!

Actually, the CDC was simply the federal agency enforcing the law enacted by Congress. So you can't blame them, they didn't create the unconstitutional law. A Democrat-controlled Congress did under Section 4024 of the CARES Act of 2020.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Check the context.

The context still doesn't explain the questioned statement.

I don't agree. You may be of the opinion that the moon is made of blue cheese. If you state, 'the moon is made of blue cheese' people will ridicule your lack of intelligence. If you state, 'imo the moon is made of blue cheese' people will likely chuckle and move on. A clear case of opinion vs. perceived belief.

Except the Moon being composed of green cheese is an either/or proposition. How the Supreme Court has ruled on an issue is slightly less an either/or proposition. Whether we think the Court has ruled correctly is, of course, a matter of opinion.

 

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Just admit it, Glitch. You want more people thrown out on the streets. How Christian of you.

How do you make up lies and expect to be taken serious ?
He did not Force people to not work , The Government Did! He is not focusing on how people can or cannot take care of themselves!
He is pointing out how Unconstitutional it is for a NON-Elected Government organization to dictate policy in America!
He's also pointing out how this is Governmental Oppression of Citizens !

All Americans would rather have people on the Streets in a FREE America, than those people in houses under a Dictatorship !

P.S. no one is stopping all you WONDERFUL DEMs/Libs from taking in all the poor unfortunate homeless people that exist !
How many are you given shelter to now? You're free to do so ! You seem OH SO CONCERNED! With your crocodile tears and all ...

Using the "Good Christian" trick to get people to support Liberal Fascism isn't going to work ! Sorry....

 

[mrjurrs]

As I already pointed out, the Supreme Court will not hear the case.

The eviction moratorium has already been held unconstitutional, by two different federal judges. The DOJ, on appeal, managed to get a stay on the law's annulment until June 30th. Which is when the current Supreme Court session ends.

The higher court only hears the case if it is appealed. There have been lots of laws held to be unconstitutional by lower federal courts that were never appealed. Such as the Communication Decency Act of 1996 that a three judge panel held to be unconstitutional.


The case is moot because there has been no more appeals by the DOJ. The last decision stands.


As I said in the OP, this is not about the CDC. This is about Congress enacting a law for which they have no constitutional authority, in violation of the Tenth Amendment.

Doesn't matter how many times you said it, the CDC's actions are not unconstitutional. There is zero 10th Amendment issues. Congress created the CDC just like they created the SEC, the IRS and the Federal Reserve.

 

[Phys251]

How do you make up lies and expect to be taken serious ?

See my sig #2.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Doesn't matter how many times you said it, the CDC's actions are not unconstitutional. There is zero 10th Amendment issues. Congress created the CDC just like they created the SEC, the IRS and the Federal Reserve.

Two courts apparently have decided otherwise. You may think they are wrong, but you should maybe add an "imo" your posts that are "not supported by facts."

 

[mrjurrs]

Two courts apparently have decided otherwise. You may think they are wrong, but you should maybe add an "imo" your posts that are "not supported by facts."

Has anything changed? No. Will this case be advanced or appealed? No. Effectively, the question was never asked.

 

[Bodi]

Just admit it, Glitch. You want more people thrown out on the streets. How Christian of you.

@Glitch 'twas my thought as well...

 

[Bodi]

Are you not able to read? I only mentioned the unconstitutional law three times in the OP. Here it is again:

Public Law 116-136 (a.k.a. CARES Act of 2020). Specifically, Section 4024 under that law violates the US Constitution. Congress does not have the constitutional authority to prevent evictions, even temporarily.

All people have to do is amass socially via social media platforms and ignore evictions and become millions upon millions of squatters...

Could you imagine the time, money and effort it would take to overcome this morally acceptable action of and by the people?

 

[Bodi]

What is the objective here ?

To enable landlords to evict people or to keep people with a roof over their heads ?

Some people only care about money, what is "theirs", guns and enslaving women... it is a sad position but one that they are unashamed about.

The Constitution is not the sole supreme law of the land.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."

Exactly... and the UN has listed rights that people have the far exceed the rights of the US Constitution.

 

[Bodi]

It remains Constitutional until the Supreme Court says otherwise. Correction: I win. You lose.

Nope. Even then it might not be Constitutional.

 

[molten_dragon]

Whether it's eventually found to be constitutional or not I don't know. Personally, I don't think congress concerned themselves with whether it was constitutional or not when they passed it, because it didn't really matter. The law only needed to stand for a short period of time, and it takes quite awhile for cases to make their way through the federal court system. Even with several extensions, the moratorium will most likely end anyway before a final decision is rendered on whether the law was constitutional in the first place.

I think a lot of laws and executive orders, both state and federal, were issued to handle the pandemic that way. They were known to be unconstitutional but they'd stand for long enough to serve their purpose before they were struck down.

If the law is determined to be unconstitutional the CDC order will cease to exist, and every resident who benefited from this illegal temporary eviction moratorium order will lose a lot more than just their homes. They will be held financially accountable to the leaseholder for every penny, plus interest, that they didn't pay.

This part isn't really that big a deal because the moratorium didn't release people from their obligation to pay rent, it just banned evictions for not paying rent due to the pandemic. That rent is still owed whether the moratorium stands or not.

 

[Glitch]

Doesn't matter how many times you said it, the CDC's actions are not unconstitutional. There is zero 10th Amendment issues. Congress created the CDC just like they created the SEC, the IRS and the Federal Reserve.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Or are you just unable to comprehend what you read?

I never once said anything that the CDC did was unconstitutional. Get a clue.

Congress (not the CDC) enacted a law that two federal judges have already held to be unconstitutional, in violation of the Tenth Amendment.

It is as if you suddenly lost all ability to comprehend even the simplest thing. What is your malfunction, or is this just another symptom of leftist psychosis?

 

[Glitch]

Whether it's eventually found to be constitutional or not I don't know. Personally, I don't think congress concerned themselves with whether it was constitutional or not when they passed it, because it didn't really matter.

Of course it matters. The government is required to abide by the US Constitution at all times. That is the purpose of the US Constitution, to limit the powers of the federal government. It is very obvious that leftist filth don't give a damn about the US Constitution or any of the laws of this nation, as this thread demonstrates.

The law only needed to stand for a short period of time, and it takes quite awhile for cases to make their way through the federal court system. Even with several extensions, the moratorium will most likely end anyway before a final decision is rendered on whether the law was constitutional in the first place.

The final decision has already been rendered, and found to be in violation of the US Constitution. The illegal law will become null and void after June 30th.

I think a lot of laws and executive orders, both state and federal, were issued to handle the pandemic that way. They were known to be unconstitutional but they'd stand for long enough to serve their purpose before they were struck down.

Unconstitutional laws do not need to be obeyed, and those making them should be arrested.

This part isn't really that big a deal because the moratorium didn't release people from their obligation to pay rent, it just banned evictions for not paying rent due to the pandemic. That rent is still owed whether the moratorium stands or not.

Now, because of this illegal law, tens of thousands will be thrown unto the streets in July and be held accountable for every penny they have not paid, plus interest. This is why those who enact illegal laws need to be held accountable. Naturally, it is always those who have absolutely no regard for the laws of the nation anyway - the leftist filth within the Democratic Party.

 

[molten_dragon]

Of course it matters. The government is required to abide by the US Constitution at all times. That is the purpose of the US Constitution, to limit the powers of the federal government. It is very obvious that leftist filth don't give a damn about the US Constitution or any of the laws of this nation, as this thread demonstrates.


The final decision has already been rendered, and found to be in violation of the US Constitution. The illegal law will become null and void after June 30th.


Unconstitutional laws do not need to be obeyed, and those making them should be arrested.

You're missing the point. It was irrelevant to congress whether the law was constitutional or not. By the time a court could nullify it, it would already have largely solved its purpose. And there's no penalty for congress passing unconstitutional laws.

Now, because of this illegal law, tens of thousands will be thrown unto the streets in July and be held accountable for every penny they have not paid, plus interest. This is why those who enact illegal laws need to be held accountable. Naturally, it is always those who have absolutely no regard for the laws of the nation anyway - the leftist filth within the Democratic Party.

The CARES act passed 96-0 in the senate. Seems pretty disingenuous to blame only the democratic party.

 

[mrjurrs]

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Or are you just unable to comprehend what you read?

I never once said anything that the CDC did was unconstitutional. Get a clue.

Congress (not the CDC) enacted a law that two federal judges have already held to be unconstitutional, in violation of the Tenth Amendment.

It is as if you suddenly lost all ability to comprehend even the simplest thing. What is your malfunction, or is this just another symptom of leftist psychosis?

The law was found by two courts to be unconstitutional. Have those decisions been appealed? No, the case is dead, therefore the law is not unconstitutional. If resurrected, you can continue your argument. As it stands, it's just you shouting into the wind. The law stands.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

The law was found by two courts to be unconstitutional. Have those decisions been appealed? No, the case is dead, therefore the law is not unconstitutional. If resurrected, you can continue your argument. As it stands, it's just you shouting into the wind. The law stands.

Where do you get this cornball idea that this is how anything works?

 

[mrjurrs]

Where do you get this cornball idea that this is how anything works?

Lower courts decisions on Constitutional claims remain valid only after SCOTUS declines to hear an appeal (unless of course SCOTUS claims original jurisdiction). SCOTUS has not declined to hear an appeal, so the Constitutionality of that law remains pending. Since it will not go forward, the laws constitutionality is unchanged. Remember, you are not looking at the law, you are looking at a portion of the law.

End result, Congress would be foolish to insert the same language in another bill. But the call is 'no harm, no foul'

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Lower courts decisions on Constitutional claims remain valid only after SCOTUS declines to hear an appeal (unless of course SCOTUS claims original jurisdiction). SCOTUS has not declined to hear an appeal, so the Constitutionality of that law remains pending. Since it will not go forward, the laws constitutionality is unchanged. Remember, you are not looking at the law, you are looking at a portion of the law.

End result, Congress would be foolish to insert the same language in another bill. But the call is 'no harm, no foul'

Again, where are you getting this cornball information?

It's true the provision hasn't been struck down in it's entirety nationwide, but in the jurisdictions over which those courts preside it certainly has.

 

[Rich2018]

All Americans would rather have people on the Streets in a FREE America, than those people in houses under a Dictatorship !

I rather suspect your POV would change if you were one of the people thrust on to the streets to find somewhere to sleep.

 

[tshade]

Nope. Even then it might not be Constitutional.

????????????????? no ifs about it. If the SC says it is, then it is...

 

[Bodi]

????????????????? no ifs about it. If the SC says it is, then it is...

Except when they are wrong...

 

[Bodi]

How do you make up lies and expect to be taken serious ?
He did not Force people to not work , The Government Did! He is not focusing on how people can or cannot take care of themselves!
He is pointing out how Unconstitutional it is for a NON-Elected Government organization to dictate policy in America!
He's also pointing out how this is Governmental Oppression of Citizens !

All Americans would rather have people on the Streets in a FREE America, than those people in houses under a Dictatorship !

P.S. no one is stopping all you WONDERFUL DEMs/Libs from taking in all the poor unfortunate homeless people that exist !
How many are you given shelter to now? You're free to do so ! You seem OH SO CONCERNED! With your crocodile tears and all ...

Using the "Good Christian" trick to get people to support Liberal Fascism isn't going to work ! Sorry....

It is hard to take any person seriously that finishes almost all sentences with an "!"....

 

[Rich2018]

????????????????? no ifs about it. If the SC says it is, then it is...

So any dissenting voices don't count ?