Supreme Court Partially Blocks New York Eviction Moratorium: Read It For Yourself

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

14 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    Didn’t we used to have people whose job it was to wander over to another building with some donuts, sit down with some other people, and begin a short question with the word “hypothetically…”?Report

  2. Brandon Berg says:

    Currently the unemployment rate is 5.4%, which is about average for the last 50 years. And the job openings rate is at an all-time high. Look at this. It’s nuts:

    https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/job-openings-unemployment-beveridge-curve.htm

    There’s really nothing which points to the US currently being in the kind of unprecedented economic crisis that would justify this kind of unprecedented measure. Even during the pandemic, aggregate personal income spiked due to stimulus and unemployment bonus. It’s only just returned to the pre-pandemic trend:

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PI

    Democrats are acting like it’s 2010, and it just isn’t. Nothing about the current situation even vaguely resembles the economic situation in 2010.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Brandon Berg says:

      People aren’t getting evicted or threatened with it for their current circumstances. They are going to get tossed for being out of work do 6-12 months and not paying rent during that time. There is assistance out ther for them to hand checks to landlords, but as we have discussed elsewhere that assistance is being very slow rolled by the states. Plus turning 6-11 millions renters (depending on who you believe) on to the streets won’t help tamp down the delta surge, which in some places may well re-tank local economies.

      Keeping the moratorium in place at least until the rent support flows is a way better option in so many ways.Report

      • Oscar Gordon in reply to Philip H says:

        But this isn’t about the moratorium specifically, but rather about landlords being denied any opportunity to prove a case.

        I mean, if Don Jr. Is taking advantage of the moratorium to avoid paying rent (because the Trumps are that kind of people), shouldn’t his landlord be allowed to present evidence that Don is not suffering?Report

        • Philip H in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

          They are not being denied an opportunity permanently. And what case are they so hot to prove? That people put out of work or otherwise economically damaged by a global pandemic couldn’t pay rent? That requires forcing further injury to tenants why exactly?Report

          • Oscar Gordon in reply to Philip H says:

            I have no idea, but I think the court is right that refusing to even hear a case is wrong, whether it’s temporary or not

            We do need to get over this idea that landlords are sitting on vast cash reserves that allow them to whether this better than tenants.Report

          • Oscar Gordon in reply to Philip H says:

            PS I get your point about landlord assistance not being distributed and I agree with you that it’s on the state governments to get it out there, but they aren’t, and perhaps if landlords could leverage the courts, the states would feel the pressure to get their feces consolidated.Report

            • Philip H in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

              Landlords aren’t sitting on great cash hordes.

              Tenants are generally not sitting on great cash horses either. Which leads to a fundamental economic problem. Evicting people won’t solve that probables short term and may create additional significant economic and public health problems medium to long term.

              And frankly – what good is a hearing in eviction if no decision can be rendered? It wastes court, landlord and tenant resources and doesn’t move the ball any.

              Finally, I don’t see a groundswell of landlords leaning on state politicians now, when doing so would potentially get them relief. Being able to go to a hearing that results in no further action isn’t likely to changes that.Report

              • Oscar Gordon in reply to Philip H says:

                “Great Cash Horses” sounds like something our 0.01% class would have…

                My whole read on this is that according to the law, if a landlord can get a hearing and prove their case, they can get an eviction. And they point was that they could not get a hearing. So an action would be possible, if they could get a hearing.

                Do I have that wrong?Report

  3. Brandon Berg says:

    I posted a comment with two links and it got held for moderation. I vaguely remember someone saying that comments can include up to two links without getting sent to moderation; is the limit still one after all?

    I did not edit the comment, and I don’t think it has any naughty words.Report