The court conveyed its decision in an eight-page, unsigned statement, saying the CDC`s authority to take action to contain the coronavirus pandemic does not appear to extend to imposing a moratorium on evictions. The majority said the Biden administration is advocating for giving the agency «a staggering amount of authority.» A divided Supreme Court has ended a national moratorium on evictions in parts of the country ravaged by the coronavirus pandemic, lifting protections for millions of Americans unable to pay their rent. The court`s three liberal justices disagreed, saying the majority`s rush to end the moratorium was inappropriate and outdated. The majority of the court said the CDC exceeded its authority with the temporary ban. But protesters and some lower courts that have considered the issue say power is limited by another provision of the law that lists measures such as «fumigation, disinfection, hygiene, pest control.» With its August order, the CDC aimed to temporarily halt evictions in areas where coronavirus cases were rising, citing significant transmission of the Delta variant. The agency said at the time that more than 80 percent of U.S. counties were classified as having high or high transmission rates in the community. The Supreme Court ruled Aug. 26 to end the temporary suspension following a lower court ruling to lift the federal moratorium on evictions issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Thus, the Supreme Court decision invalidates the federal moratorium on evictions and eliminates important protections against evictions that have stably welcomed millions of households — mostly people of color. This decision illustrates the long series of American legal interventions that ignore the suffering of blacks. While contemporary understanding of the federal justice system is shaped by recent social liberal successes at Warren Court and LGBT litigation at Roberts Court, the judiciary is, by definition, the completely undemocratic branch of government and has long been a place for reactionary and illiberal decision-making. For this reason, many have argued that even if the courts allow for substantial social change, the efforts of reformers will be better spent on advancing legislative action.
By Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856), Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Korematsu v. United States (1944) in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the justice system has perpetuated, justified, and objectified white supremacist and classist violence. And the era of liberal social gains seems to be fading, with the recent functional reversal of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court. Taking black voters for granted is nothing new in American politics. That is why we have said that demonstrations are just as important as votes. Representative Bush`s valiant efforts to extend the moratorium on deportations showed that it was not House votes that changed the Biden administration`s mind, but direct action. Voters, too, have more power in their direct action than at the ballot box; Rent strikes, labor strikes, and civil disobedience are all forms of protest that have the ability to empower blacks.
Nearly two months after a divided court approved an earlier moratorium, the Supreme Court on Thursday night blocked the Biden administration from enforcing the recent federal moratorium on evictions imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The justices split along ideological lines, with the court`s three liberal justices — Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — departing from the eight-page unsigned decision. The decision was the Biden administration`s second defeat on the so-called «ghost race» in three days after the court on Tuesday night refused to block a lower court order requiring the Biden administration to resume the Trump-era policy of «staying in Mexico.» The Court noted that since the previous trial in this case, the government has had more time to allocate funds to help tenants affected by the pandemic. Congress also indicated, the court said, that it would have to take action if the moratorium were to be extended, but it did not. The court noted that «our system does not allow agencies to act illegally, even if they pursue desirable goals,» concluding that it is now «for Congress, not the CDC, to decide whether to extend the moratorium.» However, Congress did not respond, and initially the Biden administration said its hands were tied. After pressure from constituencies and congressional liberals, one of whom camped outside the U.S. Capitol to raise awareness of the issue, the administration released a new, slightly limited version of the moratorium. But the president was also fatalistic. AAR, p.
2, citing 42 U.S.C. ¢§ 264(a). The court recognized the CDC`s authority to take steps to prevent the interstate spread of the disease by identifying, isolating, and destroying the disease itself. However, the court found that the CDC order was too indirect. An attempt has been made to regulate the eviction of a subset of tenants who could move from one state to another, with a smaller subgroup potentially infected with COVID-19. The Supreme Court noted that Congress could speak clearly by authorizing an agency to exercise the powers of enormous economic and political importance exercised by the CDC in its order, but Congress had not done so. In addition, the CDC order invades an area that falls within the specific realm of state law: the landlord-tenant relationship. Without clear congressional authorization, which was missing, the CDC order was too broad and was properly struck down. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said in a dissenting opinion that the outcome of the case was not as clear as the majority had suggested and that the court did not have the right to end the moratorium so quickly, at a time when COVID-19 cases are rising. This tracker is linked to news reports on the growing eviction crisis in various cities and states.
Following the Supreme Court decision, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen; U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland; and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia L. Fudge sent a letter to all governors, mayors, county councils, chief justices and state court administrators asking for help preventing unnecessary evictions during the pandemic.