This note is the first to systematically analyze constitutional challenges to rent control law landlords sought to bring before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2023-24 term. This note analyzes the constitutionality of rent control in the wake of the Court’s 2021 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, focusing on the central argument of the landlord petitioners— that limitations on eviction in the rent control laws constitute per se physical takings. This note argues that rent control laws do not effect an unconstitutional taking of landlords’ property. It departs from existing scholarship by focusing on the significance of Cedar Point—and its extension of the category of per se physical takings—for the constitutionality of rent control ordinances. This note proposes novel arguments to defend rent control in the face of the new takings clause challenges, arguments that have been raised neither in the briefs opposing Supreme Court review nor in existing scholarship. It articulates four arguments: (1) rent control laws affect no physical invasion of landlords’ property; (2) striking down rent control law would place the Court on a slippery slope threatening both fair housing laws and basic features of landlord-tenant law; (3) the restrictions on eviction contained in rent control laws are fair conditions for landlords receiving the benefits of residential zoning; and (4) tenants, particularly low-income tenants, have a strong interest in remaining in their existing homes and preserving their communities.

Read more