The Alabama Association of Realtors et al. Plaintiffs against the Department of Health and Human Services filed an emergency motion to enforce the Supreme Court’s Ruling and to Vacate the stay pending appeal. but the court denied the motion.
The radical Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act Pub. L. NO 116-136 134 state 281 2020. This was due to Congress enacting a 120-day eviction moratorium that applied to all rental properties receiving federal assistance. Later, that moratorium was expanded into a broader eviction moratorium that applied to ALL rental properties in the United States.
This caused massive damage to the real estate industry and the rental industry. The case number is #20-CV-3377 DLF
The halt in the residential evictions was to prevent the further spread of Covid-19. This, of course, made no sense; how can an eviction moratorium stop the spread of the Covid-19 virus?
In the following weeks, the Biden Administration repeatedly stated ” we will not further extend the eviction moratorium in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling, which we understand as meaning, to make clear the option is not longer available.
Then White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki stated that the administration stressed that the CDC did agree with the interpretation and that the CDC director and her team have been unable to find ANY legal authority, even for a more targeted eviction moratorium that would focus on counties with higher rates of COVID spread.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki LIED, just days later, on August 3, 2021, three days after the prior statement, the CDC renewed a moratorium on eviction in the Untied States. This was again stated ” to protect the further spread of COVID-19. This is Radical Madness!
This time the moratorium was to run until October 2021.
Analysis of this case: before the court could address the plaintiff’s’ motion. The Court needed to decide if the current moratorium was an extension of the original moratorium or an entirely new policy. Because the current moratorium is an extension, and is subject to the stay and can only be challenged in this action. However, the law of the case doctrine prevented the Court from lifting the stay, and therefore the court denied the plaintiffs ‘ motions
What does this mean?
When the circumstances have changed such that the court’s reasons for imposing the stay no longer exist or are inappropriate, the court may lift the stay sua sponte or upon motion. The party that seeks a continuation of a stay “bears the burdern of showing his entitlement .”
In this case, the Court assessed whether to lift the stay or consider the traditional four-stay factors:
(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits;
(2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay:
(3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and.
(4) where the public interest lies.
So instead of addressing this matter or those factors on the merits, the Biden Administration argued that the law-of-the-case doctrine required the court to maintain the stay as a matter of law. The court agreed because the D.C. Circuit’s judgement affirming the stay binds the court, and the Supreme Court did not overrule that judgement. The Court then denied the plaintiffs’ motion.
In a legal twist, the decision of the 6th and 11th Circuit Court does not bind this Court. And even if the district courts have discretion to reappraise the equities in extraordinary circumstances, this Court lacked the power or authority to reach the opposite conclusion of the D.C. Circuit on the same issues, in the same emergency posture, and in the same case.
Finally, to lift the stay, the plaintiffs must accordingly seek relief before the D.C. Circuit, which may depart legally from the law of the case when there is an intervening change in controlling legal authority or when a previous decision was clearly erroneous and would work a manifest of injustice.
In essence, the Biden Administration will continue to tear down the real estate and rental house industry, using the COVID-19 as their excuse. The effects of the eviction moratorium will be devastating to these industries and felt for year to come. Does this affect Wyoming? YES!