PolicyBrief
S. 470
119th CongressFeb 6th 2025
Respect State Housing Laws Act
IN COMMITTEE

This bill removes federal overreach by allowing state and local eviction moratoriums to proceed without conflicting with the CARES Act.

Cindy Hyde-Smith
R

Cindy Hyde-Smith

Senator

MS

LEGISLATION

Respect State Housing Laws Act: CARES Act Housing Provision Gets the Axe

The "Respect State Housing Laws Act" is short and to the point—it removes subsection (c) from Section 4024 of the CARES Act. That's literally it. But what does that mean? To get a handle on the real-world impact, we need to dig into what Section 4024(c) actually covered.

Digging Into the Details

The CARES Act, passed back in 2020, was a massive piece of legislation designed to address the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic. Section 4024 specifically dealt with temporary protections for renters facing eviction. We need to figure out what subsection (c) did. Without that, it's impossible to know who this change might help or hurt. It could be anything from a minor technical correction to a significant shift in renter protections or landlord obligations. It's like saying, "We removed a part of the engine." Great, but which part? The fuel injector or the air filter?

Potential Impacts - Unknown for Now

Because the bill (SEC. 2) just deletes a piece of existing law, the impact is entirely dependent on what that piece was. It could:

  • Streamline things: Maybe subsection (c) was redundant or created unnecessary hurdles for landlords or tenants.
  • Shift the balance: It could remove a protection for renters, or a requirement for landlords. Or the opposite, depending on the details.
  • Create confusion: If state and federal laws now conflict, it could lead to legal challenges and uncertainty in the housing market.

The Bottom Line

Right now, this bill is a mystery box. The "Respect State Housing Laws Act" sounds like it's about giving states more control, but until we know the specifics of the removed subsection, we can't say what it really does. It highlights how seemingly small changes to legislation can have big, and sometimes unexpected, consequences down the line. This one requires a follow-up once we can get our hands on the details of the specific subsection that's been removed.