Shift eviction notices to state rules

Full Title:
Respect State Housing Laws Act

Summary#

This bill deletes subsection (c) of Section 4024 of the CARES Act. The sponsors say the change removes a federal requirement that lessors (landlords) provide a notice to vacate. The broad goal is to let state and local housing laws control eviction notice requirements.

  • Main change: removes the CARES Act requirement for lessors to give a notice to vacate by striking subsection (c) of Section 4024 (15 U.S.C. 9058).
  • Scope: the change applies only to the part of the CARES Act created by Section 4024; other CARES Act provisions are not changed by this bill.
  • Likely effect: notice-to-vacate rules would be governed by state or local law instead of that federal provision for the properties covered by Section 4024.
  • What is unclear: the bill text does not include the text of the struck subsection or explain exactly which tenants or property types are affected; a reader must compare current law to see the precise scope.

What it means for you#

  • Tenants in properties covered by Section 4024: This could mean the federal notice-to-vacate requirement no longer applies. State or local notice rules would likely determine how much warning you must get before an eviction starts.
  • Landlords / lessors of properties covered by Section 4024: You would no longer be required by that federal provision to provide a notice to vacate. You would generally follow state or local eviction notice rules.
  • Courts and local housing agencies: Eviction procedures for affected properties would rely on state or local law rather than the removed federal notice requirement.
  • Other residents and property owners: If you are not in a property covered by Section 4024, this bill likely changes nothing for you.
  • Government administrators: The bill only deletes one subsection; agencies enforcing the CARES Act would need to adjust guidance to reflect the removal, but the bill does not explain administrative steps.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

  • The bill text and the summary provided do not include a fiscal note or cost estimate.
  • It is not clear whether removing the federal notice requirement would change federal spending, state costs, court caseloads, or enforcement expenses.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to return control over eviction notice rules to states and localities by removing a federal notice requirement.
  • A possible argument for the bill is that it reduces conflicting rules between federal and state law and simplifies compliance for landlords who operate in multiple states.
  • Supporters may view the change as respecting states’ existing housing and eviction laws.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that removing a federal notice requirement could weaken tenant protections that were put in place by the CARES Act, potentially leading to faster or more frequent evictions in some places.
  • The bill does not clearly say which tenants or property types are affected, so it may create uncertainty during the transition.
  • A possible trade-off is inconsistent protection across states: tenants in some states could lose notice protections they had under the federal provision while tenants in other states keep stronger rules.