Texas Orders it's Judges to NOT comply with CDC moratorium

[Patrick M.]

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/07...
Well it would seem that Texas is standing up for its landlords. This reporting is extremely bias and also shows the divide even among landlords.

Even a major landlord group seems a bit baffled by the ruling. David Mintz, vice president of government affairs with the Texas Apartment Association, says he has been reaching out to the Texas Justice Court Training Center.

"We have asked them to clarify their guidance," Mintz says. "We believe that the courts do have the ability to consider CDC declarations that are provided to them."

Why would anyone continue to support this landlord group?

[Joe Splitrock]

Originally posted by @Patrick M.:

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/07...
Well it would seem that Texas is standing up for its landlords. This reporting is extremely bias and also shows the divide even among landlords.

Even a major landlord group seems a bit baffled by the ruling. David Mintz, vice president of government affairs with the Texas Apartment Association, says he has been reaching out to the Texas Justice Court Training Center.

"We have asked them to clarify their guidance," Mintz says. "We believe that the courts do have the ability to consider CDC declarations that are provided to them."

Why would anyone continue to support this landlord group?

 A Federal judge in Texas ruled the CDC order unconstitutional in February. His ruling basically stated that the CDC overstepped it's authority and interfered with states rights. There is nothing baffling here. A judge stated the CDC order is invalid and the Texas supreme court stated they will not enforce the order.

This is no different than all the states that refused to enforce federal immigration laws or the states that refuse to enforce federal marijuana laws. States exert their own rights and there is little the federal government can do. The federal government can potentially litigate it to the supreme court, where they are guaranteed to lose. 

The article is very biased. It refers to Federal rent assistance on its way, but this is actually the third round of federal rent assistance on top of considerable unemployment and other assistance. It is fair to say these renters are not putting in effort to getting help or they are not using their money to pay rent. Unfortunately threat of eviction is probably necessary to shock them into action. Even the technology consultant and her son referenced in the article would have just gotten $1400 each in stimulus money, not to mention unemployment benefits. There is no explanation of where that money has gone. Maybe reporters need to start asking hard questions, instead of writing opinion pieces based on their naïve understanding of the world. "You got thousands of dollars in assistance, where did that money go?" Renters were able to defer car loans, defer student loans, get utility assistance, food assistance, so tell us where did the money go...