Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
New Dispatch from the People’s Hellhole of Seattle
Once again, Seattle is at the forefront of “Leftists destroy everything they touch”. Two landlord/tenant disputes came before the court in Seattle this week and were thrown out. The first story concerns a landlord who was known as a “slumlord” in the past. His case for evicting a tenant described as “a hoarder”, who owes the landlord $25,000 in back rent, was denied by the court, meaning he must continue to house the tenant for free. The story is here. Here’s the money quote.
Additionally, Haglund pointed out that hoarders are a protected class.
Hoarding is considered a disorder and renters with the disability are a protected class under the Fair Housing and Americans with Disabilities Acts, according to the Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry and Law.
The second story concerns a Seattle law preventing landlords from considering a tenant’s criminal history when screening prospective tenants. A US District Court judge upheld the law, which means that a sex offender can move into the apartment next to you and your kids, and the landlord cannot reject him.
The Seattle City Council adopted the law in 2017, and it has remained in effect since. The Fair Chance Housing ordinance made it an unfair practice for landlords and tenant screening services to “require, disclosure, inquire about, or take an adverse action against a prospective occupant, a tenant, or a member of their household, based on any arrest record, conviction record, or criminal history.”
In other landlord-discrimination news, Seattle has again extended its eviction moratorium due to the Covid pandemic, until the end of September. The question remains, will Seattle have any rental property left if landlords must house tenants for free? There have already been stories of small landlords throwing in the towel and selling, and leaving the city. Tenants and miscreants have the upper hand in Seattle.
Published in Law
OK, I checked the first story. I had the impression, from the OP, that the “Haglund” who raised the protected status of “hoarders” would have been the judge, though the OP didn’t say this. “Haglund” turns out to be the landlord. I may be missing something, but I don’t think that the story reports an unsuccessful eviction action, either on this basis or some other basis. It does reference the eviction moratorium, so it appears to me that the landlord hasn’t brought a lawsuit (which would be pointless, if there is a moratorium).
The second story seems to focus on the federal court decision upholding the statute preventing “discrimination” against criminals. The statute is a very bad idea, in my estimation. Blaming the federal court doesn’t seem appropriate, as it’s not obvious to me that this reprehensible statute is unconstitutional (or otherwise in violation of federal law). Though that’s just a first impression. It seems to fall in the category for which Justice Scalia used to say that judges should have a stamp: “Stupid but constitutional.”
I know that the courts disagree, but I just don’t see how this isn’t a violation of the 4th and 5th Amendments.
#1, don’t be a landlord. Everything will be your fault and your loss if you become one.
#2, if you do become a landlord make sure you are a slumlord. Why? See #1.
So, that means it’s okay for me to hoard guns?