|
|
| Supreme Court Backs Public Housing Drug Ban |
|
Posted by FoM on March 26, 2002 at 18:26:47 PT By Charles Lane, Washington Post Staff Writer Source: Washington Post 
The Supreme Court ruled today that public housing authorities around the country may evict tenants because members of their households, or guests, are using drugs, even if the evicted tenant was unaware of the drug use.Four evicted public housing tenants from Oakland, Calif., sued in federal court to get their apartments back, claiming that they had not known what their friends or family were doing. The residents further argued that Congress could not have meant to punish unwitting individuals when it passed a 1988 law telling housing projects to require tenants to control drug use in their apartments. A lower federal appeals court agreed with the tenants last year. But in a unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the court held that Congress had spoken "unambiguously." "There is an obvious reason why Congress would have permitted local public housing authorities to conduct no-fault evictions," Rehnquist wrote, quoting the language of federal regulations implementing the 1988 law. "Regardless of knowledge, a tenant who 'cannot control drug crime, or other criminal activities by a household member which threaten health or safety of other residents, is a threat to other residents and the project.'‚" The case posed an apparent dilemma, asking the court to decide between a rule that may cost certain seemingly innocent low-income individuals their publicly subsidized homes, and the interests of both the public housing authority and other tenants and neighbors in maintaining a zero-tolerance drug policy. Noting that Congress had found a drug-dealer-imposed "reign of terror" in public housing, the court sided emphatically with the latter. It reasoned simply that the evicted tenants had signed a lease providing for their eviction if anyone in their apartments used drugs--no exceptions. The court reversed the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals which had ruled in favor of the California tenants, including 63-year-old Pearlie Rucker, whose mentally disabled daughter was caught with cocaine three blocks from the apartment she shared with her mother and other family members. When the case was argued before the court last month, some justices seemed sympathetic to the senior citizens. But in today's 8-0 decision, they agreed that the law allowed their evictions. Justice Stephen Breyer did not participate in the decision. Such evictions are "common" under normal landlord-tenant law, Rehnquist's opinion observed. The case is HUD v. Rucker, et al., No. 00-1770, consolidated with Oakland Housing Authority v. Rucker, et al., No. 00-1781. Note: Justices Rule Tenants Responsible for Any Illegal Drug Activity. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Source: Washington Post (DC) Related Articles: Supreme Court Approves Public Housing Drug Ban One Strike and Out, in Public Housing Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |