Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Ilya Somin follows up on the rent-control-as-takings case that had moved through the New York courts:
The Supreme Court today decided not to hear Harmon v. Kimmel, an important case addressing the question of whether rent control can ever amount to a taking requiring compensation under the Fifth Amendment. I previously blogged about the case in this post, where I urged the Court to consider the issue, and rule that rent control can be a taking, at least in a case like this one where the property owner is required to continue renting the property indefinitely, even if he or she would prefer to devote the land to a different use. I also pointed out that there are other ways of providing affordable housing for the poor that are much more effective than rent control, and create fewer harmful side effects.
The case had been relisted by the Court, which suggests that at least some of the justices were taking an interest in it. Hopefully, the Court will revisit this issue in the future.