Baptiste, et al. v. Kennealy, et al., No. 1:20-cv-11335 (MLW) (D. Mass.) (September 25, 2020). Conference concerning future proceedings set for October 2, 2020.
The court has released a 100 page opinion articulating all of its reasons for concluding that at the time that the statewide prohibition on evictions and eviction proceedings was a valid use of the state’s emergency powers to protect public health. The court cautioned that under differing tests of constitutional sufficiency the state’s action would not survive constitutional scrutiny and stressed that changed conditions could affect the court’s determination. The court urged the governor of Massachusetts to bear the federal and state constitutions in mind when determining, upon the expiration of the emergency measures in mid-October, whether further prohibition of eviction activity is necessary.
The court struck down the state’s regulation requiring any landlord notifying a tenant of rent arrearages to provide written referrals to tenant advocates to aid in countering the landlord’s position, as such provisions were unconstitutional compelled speech, as held in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, No. 16-1140 (June 26, 2018).
The court stated that if the state agreed to abandon the regulation, the court would not enter judgment against the state.
The opinion is encyclopedic in its review of the law applicable to the use of emergency powers, particularly with reference to the Contracts Clause, the Takings Clause and the First Amendment. This indicates that the court was concerned not only with the opinion of courts of appeals reviewing the opinion but also with respect to the lens of history, noting Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
The court stated that it is possible that its denial of injunctive relief will effectively terminate the case but has ordered counsel to confer and to inform the court by October 2 of contemplated further proceedings.