By David G. Savage
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a major property rights challenge to rent-control laws in New York City and elsewhere that give tenants a right to stay for many years in apartments at below-market rates.
A group of New York landlords had sued over the laws, contending the combination of rent regulation and long-term occupancy violated the Constitution’s ban on the taking of private property for public use.
The justices had been considering taking up the appeal since late September. Only Justice Clarence Thomas issued a partial dissent on Tuesday to turning down the case.
The conservative justice said that the “constitutionality of regimes like New York City’s is an important and pressing question,” but that the landlords had failed to show evidence they’d been prevented “from evicting actual tenants for particular reasons.”
A ruling in the case could have directly affected a million rental units in New York City, and could have had a significant impact in California as well.
The California Apartment Assn. had urged the justices to hear the New York case, saying “many of its members are located in the local jurisdictions subject to rent control laws, including San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, Sacramento, Santa Monica, Berkeley, Pasadena, Alameda and Beverly Hills.”
Read more at: LA Times
