The rent stabilization regulations in New York, which place stringent restrictions on how landlords can lease certain apartments in the Empire State, were recently denied by the Supreme Court. Thus, New York’s rent regulations will remain in effect.
Owners of apartments that are governed by the legislation or of individual units filed the two cases. The challengers had sought the justices to overthrow the rent system, which has offered some of the most tenant-friendly laws in the country and regulated over a million apartments in the city for decades.
- Advertisement -
Justice Clarence Thomas, a Conservative, stated that the high court needs to take the issues made in this appeal into account in a later decision.
The justices were informed by one group of petitioners that the 1969 statute and its associated requirements, “amount to the most onerous rent control provisions the United States has ever seen” and that they result in “an unconstitutional taking without just compensation.”
The rent stabilization laws, or RSL, as they are now written, are applicable to buildings constructed before 1974 that have six or more units. The amount of rent that a landlord may charge and the annual rate increase they are permitted to make are both capped by rules. Additionally, they provide renters the option to name family members as their heirs to the property, make it more difficult for landlords to refuse to renew leases, and make it more difficult for landlords to turn rental units into condos.
In court documents, the landlords’ counsel informed the justices, “These provisions, when combined with the RSL’s ceiling on the rents that landlords can collect, have ensured that Petitioners cannot earn a just and reasonable rate of return.” They further noted, “The RSL has dramatically reduced the economic value of Petitioners’ property beyond any reasonable expectation.”
The landlords claimed that the RSL was unconstitutional under the US Constitution’s Due Process and Takings Clauses, but lower courts rejected their arguments.
The judges were informed by city attorneys that the RSL “has formed a key part of the fabric of New York City for more than five decades” and maintained that the law protects “tenants from dislocation and limits the disruption to communities that would result from dramatic changes in rental rates and rapid turnover of tenants.”
“There is no reason to grant review on any of petitioners’ questions, as none identifies issues of national importance or splits in authority requiring this Court’s intervention,” In one of the cases, they told the judges in court documents. “Petitioners’ case would needlessly disrupt the residential rental market, and countless lives, throughout the City.”
Two groups whose members include owners of units subject to the regulations as well as a few individual apartment owners filed a similar complaint against the rules earlier this term, but the justices declined to take it up.
