|
|
|
|
|
|
by nkw
2097 days ago
|
|
|
> if they want to prevent evictions they need to pay the landlords what they’re owed There is cognizable legal argument that this order might qualify as a 'taking' within the terms of the 5th amendment, which might require the government to compensate landlords, but I don't think that argument will be successful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_... |
|
|
As an aside, I wish Jacobson v Massachusetts was never a thing. It opened such a big can of worms. Public health pseudocrises now allow our government to take on full emergency powers in perpetuity.