Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)

Citation: Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)
Parent Document: Barrientos v. 1801-1825 Morton LLC (2009)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2009-10-09
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3065171/barrientos-v-1801-1825-morton-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,636 chars

[7] As evidenced by a variety of legislative enactments,
such as the now-repealed provision for PHA approval of evic-
tions and the “good cause” requirement at issue here, Con-
gress and HUD intended to provide assisted tenants with more
protections than unassisted tenants, not less. Congress only
rejected the application of substantive state and local law to
section 8 lease terminations when asked to eliminate federal
controls over such terminations altogether. Compare S. Rep.
97-139 (1981), reprinted in 1981 U.S.C.C.A.N. 396, 552,
with H.R. Rep. 97-208, at 694-95 (1981) (Conf. Rep.),
reprinted in 1981 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1010, 1053-54. Thus, it
refused to allow substantive state and local law to supplant
wholly federal termination standards. By enacting the federal
good cause requirement, it desired to maintain a uniform fed-
eral floor below which protections for tenants could not drop,
not a ceiling above which they could not rise. Importantly,
Congress and HUD never explicitly rejected the application of
more protective local standards to assisted tenants, and, in
certain cases, expressly allowed for it. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C.
§ 1437f(o)(7)(D)(vi) (“[N]othing in this section shall be con-
strued to supersede any provision of any Federal, State, or
local law that provides greater protection than this section for
victims of domestic violence . . . .”); 24 C.F.R. § 982.53(d)
14444       BARRIENTOS v. 1801-1825 MORTON LLC
(“Nothing in part 982 is intended to pre-empt operation of
State and local laws that prohibit discrimination against a Sec-
tion 8 voucher-holder because of status as a Section 8
voucher-holder.”).

Other Sections in This Document (60)

Full Text