Supreme Court Blocks President Puddin' Head's Eviction Moratorium

[PayrollHRGuy]

In Armstrong v. United States, 364 U.S. 40 (1960) Justice Black wrote...

The Fifth Amendment's guarantee that private property shall not be taken for a public use without just compensation was designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.

 

[Tax Counsel]

In Armstrong v. United States, 364 U.S. 40 (1960) Justice Black wrote...

The Fifth Amendment's guarantee that private property shall not be taken for a public use without just compensation was designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.

That's great and all as a statement of general purpose, but doesn't really address whether the CDC moratorium amounts to a taking for which the government must compensate landlords.

 

[Zigner]

That's great and all as a statement of general purpose, but doesn't really address whether the CDC moratorium amounts to a taking for which the government must compensate landlords.

According to the US Supreme Court, it does...

 

[Tax Counsel]

According to the US Supreme Court, it does...

Then please give me your citation to the opinion in which the Court specifically held that a landlord was entitled to compensation under the 5th Amendment for the CDC moratorium.

 

[Zigner]

Then please give me your citation to the opinion in which the Court specifically held that a landlord was entitled to compensation under the 5th Amendment for the CDC moratorium.

I stand corrected - that was not their specific reason for blocking the moratorium.