Supreme Court turns down claim from L.A. landlords over COVID evictions ban
Washington – In the opposition, the Supreme Court on Monday, the Supreme Court, rejected a real estate’s claim that said they had lost millions of people from unpaid rent during the Covid-19 pandemia of Los Angeles.
Without commenting, justice, “luxury apartment communities” “predominantly high -income tenants” “more than 4,800” rented an apartment owners said they would not appeal from the coalition, he said.
During the Covid-19 pandemia, they filed a lawsuit against the city looking for 20 million dollars damage from the tenants who did not pay their rents.
During this time, they claimed that the strict boundaries of the city on evacuation were influenced by violating the Constitution of private properties.
In the past, the Court has repeatedly rejected the claims that the laws of rent control were contrary to the constitution, but limited how much hosts could gather in rent.
However, LA landlords said that their claims were different because the city used their property effectively for at least a period of time. “Private property [shall not] It should be taken only for public use without compensation. “
“In March 2020, the city of Los Angeles adopted one of the most troublesome evacuation moratorai in the country, stripped the property owners … Rights to exclude tenants who do not pay” GHP told the court against the Management Corporation and to Los Angeles. “The city suppressed private ownership to public service and forced the cost of the coronavirus response to housing providers.”
“Until August 2021, when [they] The city filed a lawsuit requesting only compensation for this physical purchase, and the rents that the unreliable tenants owe were over 20 million dollars, ”he wrote.
In Los Angeles, a federal judge and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal with a decision of 3-0 rejected the case of the landlords. These judges stated decades of regulation of the property for decades.
The court had thought of the appeal since February, but only justicers Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, GHP Management Corp. And Los Angeles voted to hear the case of the city of Angeles.
Thomas, “a policy that prevents the tenants from tolerance, a policy in order to avoid rental effects, whether or not under the substance of the question of whether I will review the question,” he said. “This case meets all our usual criteria. … The Court still rejected Certiorari, leaving confusion on an important issue, and petitions are probably leaving without the chance to get the comfort they are entitled.”
Los Angeles hosts, the court, “the right to exclude the right to exclude the right to exclude a evacuation moorum to decide whether to affect the physical receipt.
In February, the city lawyer called on the court to reject the appeal.
“When a 19 -century pandemi closed his work and schools, he used temporary, emergency measures to protect the city of Los Angeles against evacuation,” he wrote. The measure did not excuse any rent debt that a tenant accrued by an affected tenant ”.
The city argued that the landlords were looking for a iki radical separation from the precedent ında in the field of property regulation.
City lawyers, “If a government receives property, it has to pay for it,” he said. “However, for more than a century, this court admitted that governments do not only have appropriate property rights due to regulation.”
The city said Covid emergency and the restriction in evacuations ended in January 2023.
In response, lawyers for the landlords, evacuation bans have become “new normal”. The Los Angeles County measure said that they will “prevent release for tenants who have not paid the latest fires”.
