Sixth Circuit Rules CDC Eviction Moratorium Is Unconstitutional

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the national eviction moratorium mandated by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is unconstitutional. The court said in its ruling that the matter ultimately needed to be resolved by Congress.

The three-judge panel ruled that the CDC engaged in federal overreach by mandating that tenants who are unable to pay their rent and are in breach of their rental agreements may not be evicted. The CDC had implemented a moratorium in response to millions of people losing their jobs due to governors shutting down their state economies to slow the spread of COVID-19.

The court upheld a ruling from U.S. District Judge Mark Norris, who in March blocked the eviction moratorium from being implemented in western Tennessee.

The CDC had argued in court that Congress authorized the eviction freeze as part of COVID-19 relief legislation and that issuing the moratorium was within its regulatory authority. The three-panel appeals court rejected their argument Friday.

“What’s the difference between executive-branch experts and congressional ones? Executive-branch experts make regulations; congressional experts make recommendations,” they wrote. “Congressional bureaucracy leaves the law-making power with the people’s representatives – right where the Founders put it.”

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the opposite way in a 5-4 decision in a case brought by landlords seeking to end the eviction moratorium.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh argued that while he believed the CDC had exceeded its authority by implementing the moratorium, he voted against ending it because the policy was set to expire on July 31 anyway.

“Landlords have been losing over $13 billion every month under the moratorium, and the total effect of the CDC’s overreach may reach up to $200 billion if it remains in effect for a year,” the National Association of Realtors said in an emergency petition they filed with the Supreme Court.

The CDC has not said if it plans to appeal the ruling, but since the ban is slated to end this month, the Pacific Legal Foundation argues the ruling reduces the likelihood that the CDC would renew the moratorium or appeal the ruling. The Foundation has sued the CDC twice on behalf of landlords. In Skyworks v. CDC, a court ruled that the CDC lacked statutory authority to enact the eviction ban.

“From the moment the CDC banned evictions nationwide, Pacific Legal Foundation has maintained that the CDC was acting both unlawfully and unconstitutionally,” Steve Simpson, a senior PLF attorney litigating cases against the CDC, said in a statement. “The Sixth Circuit has now confirmed that we were correct. It’s gratifying to see courts take their constitutional role seriously even during a pandemic.”


This article was published on July 23, 2021 and is reproduced with permission from The Center Square.


The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.