The Supreme Court converts a claim from owners of force by advertising the opening vision
Washington – With two conservatives, the High Court on Monday rejected an arrival of Los Angeles rights claim to lose millions from unpaid camps.
Without comment, the judges will not hear a complaint in the planeters who claim to rent “more than 4,800 units” in luxury communities. ”
They accuse a city that demands $ 20 million for damage from employers who did not pay their rent during the 19th epidem.
They argued with a strong home limits on dismissal then resulted in taking their private property to violate the Constitution.
In the past, the Court has repeatedly crossed that the lease control laws are illegal, although they limit their own resources.
But the Lepherds said their claim was different because the city had successfully used their property, at least for a while. They set a 5th Declaration clause “private property [shall not] A public use has been taken. “
“In March 2020, the city of Los Angeles received one of the most cruel motatoria, flatten their owners … their right to issue non-term employers,” told the Court at the GHP Management Corporation vs. Los Angeles. “The City has pushed private property into public services, eliminating the cost of its Coronavirus respondents to housing providers.”
“On August 2021, when [they] They accuse the home that you want to compensate for this body, back taxes owed by their unprofitable employers with bands of 20 million, “they wrote.
The Federal Judges in Los Angeles and the 9 district court of the Court of Appeals for 3-0 decision dismissed the householder’s suit. Those judges mentioned the following decades allow assets.
The court said he was considering a complaint from February, but only Justice Claolance Thomas and Noneil M. Goruch voted to hear Credit Management Corp management CORP. vs. City of Los Angeles.
“I can provide a question review whether the policy prevents employers who are expelled by employers in the body of employment under the law,” Thomas said. “The crime also meets all our common ways.
The Weles Angeles asked the court to decide that “that the suspension of the dismissal decreases the basic right of issuing vibrant employers.”
In February, the City Advocate’s Office has urged the court to go down a complaint.
“As a text once a epidemic who won their businesses and schools, the city of Los Angeles used temporary, emergencies to protect employers living by dismissal,” wrote. The only protected measure of those ‘can prove the most related economic hardships, “and” and not forgive credit for employment that the employee concerned is affected. “
The City argues that landowners are looking for “a powerful outgoing from premerent.”
“If the government takes property, he or she must pay for it,” said the city lawyers. “For more than a century, the Court have seen that governments are not only qualified for the rights of the fiscal rights.”
The city said the Avil emergency and the dismissal limit ended on January 2023.
In response, world lawyers say that the dismissal has become the “normal new.” They quoted the Los Angeles County
