“I Do Solemnly Swear”: Biden Calls tor Extending the Eviction Moratorium Despite Being Unconstitutional

As I discussed yesterday, I was astonished by the remarks of President Joe Biden on his support for extending the eviction moratorium, which was found to be unconstitutional by lower courts. It was later preserved by a divided Supreme Court despite the view of a majority that it was unconstitutional.  It was saved from being struck down merely by the fact that it was expiring.  President Biden acknowledged that his legal experts overwhelmingly told him that any extension would violate the Constitution. However, he then said it was worth extending the moratorium because it would take time for a court to intervene and, in the interim, they could rush out money to renters despite the lack of constitutional authority to do so.

Like many, I was mystified by the Supreme Court decision not to strike down the moratorium.  The 5-4 decision in Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS turned on the fact that it was about to expire on July 31st. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted to preserve it but Kavanaugh made clear in his opinion that he would vote against any extension as unconstitutional.  It was a decision decoupled from the merits. The unconstitutionality of the law was treated as simply inconvenient or irrelevant given the expiration.

In his press conference, President Biden acknowledged that most of the experts consulted by the White House said that an extension would be unconstitutional. However, he noted that he found a few who dismissed or rejected such views: “The bulk of the constitutional scholarship says that it’s not likely to pass constitutional muster … But there are several key scholars who think that it may and it’s worth the effort.”

Frankly, given the overwhelmingly liberal makeup of law faculties, it is astonishing that most still told the President that an extension would be unconstitutional. Moreover, it is not difficult to find experts who are cavalier about the Constitution and willing to sign off on any effort to achieve desire political or social results.

What is interesting is that Biden did not appear to accept their view but still thought violating the Constitution would be beneficial in this circumstance:

“There are a few scholars who say it will and others who say it’s not likely to, but at a minimum by the time it gets litigated it will probably give some additional time while we’re getting that $45 billion dollars out to people who are in fact behind on the rent and don’t have the money.”

The President said the quiet part out loud and admitted that they would use litigation as a delaying tactic to spend money without constitutional authority. That line will now likely be repeated at the top of any motion challenging the extension and seeking a temporary injunction.

President Biden’s position not only dismisses constitutional protections but disregards his own presidential obligations.

It was just six months ago that President Biden swore to the following words:

I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Chief Justice Roberts did not include an option for unconstitutional acts in the name of a good cause or when convenient. Biden agreed to uphold the Constitution to the best of his abilities.

The Supreme Court has made clear that the extension would be unconstitutional as was the original moratorium. Biden asked the CDC to use the very same authority in extending the moratorium to give him a pretense for the spending of federal money.  That does not seem to bother many legal experts. After all, this unconstitutional act would be done for a good cause. Yet, imagine if a Republican president announced that he was told that an order on drilling or subsidizing a religious organization was unconstitutional but would use litigation to get the money out before a court could intervene. The hue and cry in the media and from law schools would be deafening.

Biden came to office declaring a return to the “rule of law” but has actually racked up an impressive array of court losses.  Now he is treating a presumptively unconstitutional act as a purely tactical consideration to allow the spending of federal funds. That is not exactly what he pledged before he declared “so help me God” on January 20th.

125 thoughts on ““I Do Solemnly Swear”: Biden Calls tor Extending the Eviction Moratorium Despite Being Unconstitutional”

  1. A person who knowingly violates the law is a criminal. One who violates the highest law of the land is guilty of committing high crimes. Where have I have seen those words before? Throws those crime-loving Dims out before its too late!

      1. Bush contemplated policies with progressive potential, then Obama/Biden et al realized them in practice, both at home and abroad, thus the danger of a double-edged scalpel a la excess deaths in planned parent/hood facilities and practices.

    1. As usual Turkey has misquoted the President but it never seems to matter to him or anyone else on this thread. However, SCOTUS didn’t declare the moratorium unconstitutional. Turley knows that too.

  2. The SCOTUS decision stated the CDC ‘…exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium”. So isn’t the new CDC directive in direct contempt
    of the Supreme Court. Can the Court issue a contempt order and void the CDC directive? How can the Court retain its authority if is helpless in the face of outright contempt?

  3. Kind of a gray area here really. You make some sound Constitutional arguments but leave out so much pertinent context that it makes your article more of a one sided talking point than a valid argument or opinion. For all those people who were laid off or lost jobs, had to shut their businesses, etc. over this shutdown which in my layman’s opinion ought to be the real focus not addressing the symptoms and responses to it, but the actual act of telling people that they have to lose their jobs, shut down their businesses and livelihoods, etc. Easy from the comfort of a leather armchair to spout off discourse on the Constitutionality of trying to help people survive, but its a gilded vantage point to be sure, and shows an amazing lack of human compassion or even balanced or fair reasoning

    You can’t just remove the ability of people to earn a living then take away their homes and living places because they can’t pay. They can’t pay because you took away their way to earn a living then you have an obligation to make sure they “live”. Not get tossed onto the streets because it fits some legal parameter you feel overrides our own humanity.

    There has to be balance, Turley. And this is why taking one side or the other in this media driven partisan conflict we’re now living in, is a fools errand.

    Now I’m not going to get into the tit for tat troll nonsense of who’s taking advantage of the moratoriums unfairly, etc the fact is millions and millions of Americans lost their jobs and incomes, businesses, restaurants, etc and many of them never got the “forgivable loans” because the politicians on both sides handed them out to big business and their buddies, with just a fraction going to the real American small business owner. The money’s flowed like a river on this infantile panic driven and politically as well as economically motivated shutdown, and the people at the bottom didn’t get to fill their buckets like the fat cats did. So its easy to sit from the comfort of positions men like you enjoy and dole out apathy to the foundering masses, but the fact is they broke it, they gotta fix it. The economy that is.

    I was lucky, I lost some business up front but fortunately found a job as my work in my state was considered “essential” so I did not have to stop as long as I could find the work. But millions of others, and I know many myself lost their jobs, businesses, restaurants right here in town that have been here for 20 or 30 years closed up, the theater owner in town had to close, lost everything. The tattoo parlor, the dance studio, and on and on. All these people lost their ability to earn a living.

    So I don’t care if they violate the constitution ten times from Sunday in handing out money or time, or whatever they need to hand out to those who lost their jobs, businesses, livelihoods, etc. over the shutdown. Because we can’t throw millions of people onto the streets. Never mind what it would do to the country. Its about what it would do to our souls that’s the real damage here.

    There comes a time Mister Turley, when men and women have to stop being pricks, especially partisan pricks, and start giving a damn again about being decent human beings. Because the game your playing at here, with this apathetic piece of crap you just wrote, is nothing.

    Absolutely nothing.

    1. “For all those people who were laid off or lost jobs, had to shut their businesses, etc. over this shutdown which in my layman’s opinion ought to be the real focus not addressing the symptoms and responses to it, but the actual act of telling people that they have to lose their jobs, shut down their businesses and livelihoods, etc.”
      Yeah, we’re a nation on men and not law. Amazing how politically, historically and liberty obtuse you are! Are you the product of American public schools?

    2. I’ll remind the low life trolls in here cowering behind their fake names and cartoon profile pictures wasting their time in a never ending circle jerk of pompous assed buffoons arguing interminably about whatever they can find to argue about, I don’t waste my time and I don’t talk to cowards behind fake names and cartoon pictures. Period.

      Repeating myself from last night, there are three things in this life that give a man courage he doesn’t deserve.


      A pistol.

      And anonymity.

      1. Chrsi Webber:

        I’m happy to provide you any information about me that you like as I have done here for years. The regulars here know me. The drunken guests not so much.

        Oh and on the substance of your comment: You’re a dunderhead without one speck of insight into freedom, democracy or even logic. You wanna excuse criminality on some compassioante exemption grounds, you’ll find lots of support around here from natacha, Anonymous the Stupid and eb. If you want to discuss law or political philosophy rationality, I’m all ears, but hemming and hawing sentimentally won’t do around here. Oh and please remalize that the play didn’t start around here when you stumbled onstage. It’s been here since at least 2008 and many of us have seen it all along the way.

        Real name? Chris Webber? How’s the three point game still hanging?

        1. Amazing what casting a little light on inner ugliness and apathy can do to a pack of lazy self absorbed trolls,

          oh well, some of us actually have to work for a living, so I’ll say it one last time, then let the cackling clucks consume themselves.

          I don’t waste my time on trolls, Especially those who think their apathy makes them look tough. It don’t.

          A man who can’t put his name and face behind his own words isn’t much of a man (or woman). And offering to provide them somehow means nothing.

          Either you’re man (or woman) enough to put your name and face publicly behind the public crap you spew online at others all day, …or you’re not.

          Its that simple.

          And if you’re not, then the crap you spew online all day means nothing.

          1. Okay “Chris Webber” provide us exactly who you are so we can verify your claimed (or more likely feigned) transparency or quit the virtue signaling. I’ll happily reciprocate once it’s verified. Ball’s in your court. We’ll see if your money matches your mouth and who’s really the cowardly troll.

    3. Congress has the power to tax for “…general Welfare…” and send every citizen the same check (general being all).

      Congress has no power to tax for individual or specific welfare, charity for the “needy,” alms for the “poor” or redistribution of wealth.

      All men were created equal.

      All men are equal only for the split second of creation.

      After creation, all men are on their own and persist on their merits.

      The American thesis is freedom and self-reliance.

      “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is treasonous, subversive, insurrectionist, antithetical, anti-American, anti-Constitutional and base parasitism deployed against fools, stupid enough to take that bait.

      Give a man a fish, feed him for a day.

      Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.

      Parents, teach your kids to fish.

    4. Chris – do you think that this is the decent thing to do, and if so, why?

      1.Prevent landlords from evicting tenants who haven’t paid their rent in over a year
      2. Landlord still has to pay mortgage, property taxes, utilities, and upkeep
      3. Landlord cannot sell the property because they cannot evict the tenants
      4. Landlord is trapped paying so that someone else lives in their property for free, sometimes to the point that they lose their rental property for unpaid mortgage or property taxes.

      The government did indeed shut down the economy, most so in blue states. People lost their jobs. Tenants now get to live for free while landlords get impoverished.

      Why does the government keep picking winners and losers, putting one person’s needs above another? Many of those tenants are getting more in unemployment than they did working, yet they get free rent.

      It would have been more just for the government who drove people out of business to help them pay for rent, rather than stick landlords with the bill. But the politicians in power just don’t seem able to make good decisions.

      It’s easy to talk about the morality of an eviction moratorium when you’re not the one trapped paying high bills for a property that you can’t collect any rent on.

      This policy is going to lead to massive rental housing shortages and slums. Only a fool would rent their house out, or buy a rental property, now. The very second evictions are allowed, landlords are going to start the process of getting tenants out so they can sell the property. Those stuck with rental properties are going to have trouble maintaining them without income, creating slums. The landlords will probably be blamed.

      A long time ago, my parents rented out their home to pay for medical bills. These are the kinds of people that this policy will impoverish and ruin.

      Landlords are now trapped in a job the government won’t let them quit – paying money they can’t afford to let people live in their properties for free.

      This isn’t how you fix this problem.

      1. Karen S,

        “ Landlord is trapped paying so that someone else lives in their property for free, sometimes to the point that they lose their rental property for unpaid mortgage or property taxes.”

        Apparently you didn’t know that landlords were also protected. Many states suspended property tax payments and they too were protected from foreclosure by banks.

        They also qualified for federal money to cover for their own losses during the pandemic.

        “ Pandemic Loans Were Meant for Small Businesses. Why Did These Giant Property Firms Get Millions?”

        “ Their combined incomes paid their $2,275 monthly rent — until the pandemic wiped out Hodson’s business. As clients dropped off, her income fell.

        Hodson has gotten benefits from the federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program, but not enough to help them make rent, which they haven’t paid since April. The couple and other tenants in their 39-unit building say they plan to try to negotiate rent forgiveness with their landlord, San Francisco-based Mosser Companies. They say the only thing keeping them housed now is Oakland’s eviction moratorium.

        “Despite the relief, there’s no way we would be able to afford rent right now,” Hodson said recently.

        But federal pandemic assistance came through in a big way for their landlord.”

        …” Government records show Mosser Companies received a loan of between $2 million and $5 million under the Paycheck Protection Program, passed by Congress in March to help small businesses avoid layoffs during the pandemic.”


        It seems many of these companies got covered but their tenants didn’t.

      2. Karen S,

        “ The most recent U.S. stimulus package (passed in late December), included provisions for landlords and tenants specifically. The package included $25 billion in rental assistance funds which will be used to directly cover rent for struggling tenants. The funding will be distributed by state governments and community organizations, and states are beginning to receive their allocations. Tenants can apply for rental assistance which will be paid to their landlords, but landlords can also apply on their behalf (with permission), and receive reimbursement for up to 15 months of rent.”

        Landlords had plenty of options during the pandemic. Some states directly helped landlords with the government money sent to states. Many states got money to compensate for loss of property tax revenue when they suspended property tax and penalties for the duration of the pandemic.

        Landlords didn’t get left out.

      3. There you go again Karen, sticking up for those greedy capitalist pigs. Please give it a break. We need more lazy layabouts collecting another form of handout.

    5. Can I pick what part of the Constitution I can violate with regards to yours rights?

      1. 🙂 Well sure you can. It wouldn’t really be a violation because the constitution is open to various interpretations. SCOTUS has now affirmed the federal government’s power to take from those with the ability and give to those with a need. The old timey notion of our unalienable rights like Life, Liberty and Property has been redefined as privileges defined by the political class. This of course will lead to everyone being equal, that is of course those not qualified for aristocrat status. And once our class settles into this new equality paradigm, we will no doubt be contented, as we will no longer have any of those stressful desires for greater prosperity, as that option will no longer exist.

        1. “. . . take from those with the ability and give to those with a need.”

          That sounds familiar.

          1. It really does. If only we had some way of knowing how this has worked out so well, then there wouldn’t be such apprehension.

    6. For the record, I don’t give a crap who anyone is in here nor am I interested.

      Its not about who you are.

      Its about whether or not you’re man or woman enough to put your own name and face behind your own words. Its about whether or not you stand behind your own words.

      If not, then they don’t mean squat.

    7. …yea,….I thought so.

      To whatever cowering troll it may concern.

      My profile is openly linked to my web page which also has links to all my social media pages. Facebook. Twitter. Instagram, Youtube, even email.

      Has been all along. All anyone has to do is click, as I am sure they have. When I talk, I stand behind my words.

      And for the last time, I am not interested in who anyone here is.

      I could care less, so offers to “send me your info” (equation = “meet me after school by the playground”) mean squat.

      Either you’re man (or woman) enough to put your own name and face on your own public words, or you are not.

      Constant blathering trying to weasel your way out of simply putting your real name and real face behind your infantile insults and name calling and personal attacks on anyone and everyone who may have a differing opinion on a topic is pathetic. and shows your character better than anything you have to say.

      No ones stopping you but you.

      1. And for the last time, I am not interested in who anyone here is.

        Is this your last red line in the sand? You keep ranting about attacks on differing opinions. Perhaps I’ve missed where you’ve had any opinion on a topic. Here is my opinion I posted yesterday on this topic, perhaps you’d take the opportunity to offer yours.


    8. ” . . . about being decent human beings.”

      Here’s what’s indecent (and immoral):

      Violating property rights.

      Destroying contracts by government decree.

      Bankrupting those who own rental properties.

      Using fascist controls (“lockdowns”) to rationalize more fascist controls.

      Treating another individual as a means to satisfying your “need.”

      Destroying the future supply of rental housing, and thus causing rental prices to skyrocket.

      Treating property owners as rightless serfs.

      Turning the CDC into the “CTC” — the Center for Tyrannical Control.

      Using the government’s police powers to force others to do whatever you regard as “decent.”

      Did I miss anything?

  4. Turley, you’ve become a full-on Fox propagandist. How in the hell can you complain about the unconstitutionality of Biden extending the eviction moratorium on the grounds that the massive homelessness that will result is a public health crisis, but ignore Trump causing an insurrection….AND basing your criticism on the oath of office taken by the POTUS? How many times has Trump ignored the oath he took? Why nothing from Turley about this? And, WHY has Biden extended the deadline–because he’s a malignant narcissist like Trump? For humanitarian reasons, which will, in the long-run, also benefit landlords because it will prevent congested court dockets, prevent a glut of empty rental units and a glut of renters who now have bad credit and can’t get an apartment. Biden based his decision on the fact that COVID rental assistance funds have mostly not been spent. Extending the moratorium only makes sense.

    1. but ignore Trump causing an insurrection…

      I know you’re a troll, spewing out talking points. Never putting any actual intellectual activity into the posts you submit.
      But I must point out to those that do your thinking for you, there was no insurrection, or, no attempted insurrection. Not my opinion. That is from the Merrick Garland DoJ. Not a single charge of insurrection. It August. Friday will be 7 months from 1-6. a protest shown live on TV. Not a lot of unknowns to investigate. Not a single charge of insurrection.

      So this response is to your handlers, since i know you don’t do your own thinking.

    2. Natacha,
      In case you missed the news:
      1) Trump isn’t president anymore.
      2) No one has actually been charged with Insurrection, other charges yes, but not a single charge of insurrection.
      3) The Democratic congress could have changed the law, however the House had to adjourn for a SEVEN WEEK vacation.

    3. Natacha says:

      “Turley, you’ve become a full-on Fox propagandist. How in the hell can you complain about the unconstitutionality of Biden extending the eviction moratorium on the grounds that the massive homelessness that will result is a public health crisis, but ignore Trump causing an insurrection.”

      Biden is not above criticism, let’s face it. As politicians, Democrats say and do things which are often disingenuous, and they are not immune to sometimes justifying bad means for good ends. But whatever we are accused of, at least we are NOT Trumpists. They have embraced all Trump’s lies, and now they must defend them. As more incriminating information comes out, Trumpists will be hard-pressed to defend his authoritarian conduct. It will be not be feasible for them to turn their back on him after having defended him for so long. They are in bind. Because if they ever concede that he was a liar, it is an admission that they were too.

      Accordingly, it is likely that they will never admit it, and years from now, Trumpists will become like Roger Stone, a troll and conspiracy theorist ignored by all news outlets except the lunatic fringe Infowars. Stone will go to his grave proclaiming that Nixon was an honest man maligned by the press; so too Trumpists will go to their graves denying that Trump was a conman. Our fight against Trump is largely over; their fight to defend for posterity his abominable reputation is just beginning.

      This is their sad and pitiful fate, and deep down, they know it. We will be vindicated in the end, Natacha, and that should be a comfort to you.

      1. Jeff, I am extremely disappointed that an intelligent man like yourself would use the term ” We” when referring to unhinged Natacha. I guess your mutual distain for Trump unites all of your ilk no matter how ridiculous the argument. I consider you the voice of reason from the ” other side”. We have both shown a willingness to concede points to the other. As IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to be right all of the time, ( my wife being the exception), arguments from the likes of Natacha, Svelez and Fish Wings, who to my knowledge have never on conceded on anything would appear to fall into your category of irrational. You are doing yourself a disservice.

        1. Paul,

          I was not endorsing Natacha’s specific comments in the post to which I responded. I took issue with her blanket defense of Democrats and Biden. I conceded that we have our failings as well- we are ALL human. Natacha no doubt is the most hyperbolic and forceful advocate on our side. Svelaz is more circumspect and moderate in his responses. I am not that familiar with Fishwings’ posts. I enjoy EB’s erudite writing style and his perspicacious comments. This may have been the first or second instance that I have ever responded to Natacha. I was simply trying to assure her that there is no need to get so worked-up. Because Trumpists are saddled with task of defending a reprobate now and in the years to come, we can watch with amusement as they struggle to excuse all the damning facts which ineluctably will become known.

          Just this week it was revealed that Trump wanted the DOJ to simply declare that the election was corrupt and that Trump would make use of that disinformation. This is the same tactic Trump tried on Ukraine. Just announce an investigation into the Bidens- that is all. Congressman Schiff was dead-on. He warned that Trump could not be trusted not to try it again.

          We will have to see if Turley will break from the self-imposed silence by Fox News on Trump’s attempt to corrupt the DOJ (which prompted a threatened mass DOJ resignation)! Even Barr knew when to bail from the ship because he saw what was in store. Turley should condemn Trump’s attempt to get the DOJ to back-up his BIG LIE. But I’m afraid that he will not or cannot because Fox is being sued for enabling the Big Lie. You see how Turley is compromised by his Fox employment? If he remains silent on such a grave matter, we will know that he is being censored by his bosses.

          1. Jeff, if Turley resigned from Fox and put forth the exact same arguments and commentary, which it is my guess he would, does that then make him indemnified from the hypocrite accusations? I know this is a hypothetical but this is a legal blog and as you have stated hypotheticals are an intrinsic part of a legal education.

            1. Paul,

              Indemnify is the wrong word. His hypocrisy would still be a matter of record. Were he to resign from Fox, he still bears the shame of having worked there. Just like had he worked for Louis Farrakhan. Some things are never forgotten. I know that you would not feel that way, but many people consider Fox not unlike RTAmerica- a propaganda network.

              This week Tucker Carlson is hosting his show from Budapest, Hungary and is singing the praises of strongman Victor Orban who is anathema in the West. I would not be surprised if Turley is having serious second thoughts about aligning himself with Fox. I always said that Turley would live to regret working for Fox as it moves further to the fringe.

              If Turley would just acknowledge and criticize the rhetorical rage coming from Fox hosts and address Trump controversies that are blacked out by Fox executives, he will have no further problem with me.

              1. If Turley would just acknowledge and criticize the rhetorical rage coming from Fox hosts and address Trump controversies that are blacked out by Fox executives, he will have no further problem with me.

                Bwahahahaha! I see Silberman, the keyboard warrior, is still left speculating about our host because he doesn’t have the stones to email him directly. And your lame-ass excuse that you would want to be free to make his response public defies all credibility since to censor you, JT would need to defy his own free speech absolutist worldview.

                1. Olly,

                  As a lawyer you should know that where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, their communications should be kept quiet. I would think Turley would expect email communications to be kept private. And as I have said, I want Turley to be held accountable publicly, not to me personally. I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

                  1. As a lawyer you should know that where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, their communications should be kept quiet.

                    Right. That however has not been practiced in this country wittingly or unwittingly for quite some time. Having said that, JT is as public a constitutional scholar as anyone in this country. His opinions and legal analysis are widely published. He clearly is not concerned about being held accountable publicly. You can synthesize his entire body of work into a worldview that has consistently reflected a deep love of our country and unwavering respect for the institutions our founding fathers created. You and your ilk on this blog have this narcissistic view that it is Turley that has moved away from you and he somehow owes you an explanation as to why. NEWSFLASH! Jonathan Turley is the one ideologically anchored. You and the rest of this blog’s JT character assassins are the one’s who have become unmoored from this constitutional republic. And for a gang that can’t shoot straight, it’s no surprise your accuracy is only getting worse the further away you get.

                    1. Speaking of not being able to shoot straight, Andrew McCarthy has something to say about where Lefties are not aiming.

                      First, anyone notice the 800-pound gorilla Fallon fails to mention? Right . . . Congress! The media-Democrat complex drone on about Biden’s “compassion” and the “inevitable” invalidation of it by the conservative-dominated Supreme Court. But this is not a conservative-liberal controversy. It’s a division of authority question.

                      As I observed last night, the constitutional issue is not the Commerce Clause, as it would arguably take some originalist revamping of the Court’s jurisprudence to invalidate the moratorium. This is a straightforward statutory issue: Congress has not empowered the executive branch (via the CDC or any other component) to intrude on private rental contracts by barring evictions. The salient thing is not Biden’s heart or the Court’s ideological trajectory. It is that Congress has not enacted legislation that either imposes an eviction moratorium or delegates authority to do so to the CDC.

                      So . . . Fallon hopes that woke-progressives, having brow-beaten the hapless Biden into doing something he knows is illegal, will now shift gears and brow-beat the justices — they’re lookin’ at you, Brett Kavanaugh — into prioritizing empathy over black-and-white legal analysis. But what do Fallon and his allies studiously avoid suggesting? That the Democratic-controlled House and Democratic-controlled Senate propose a bill that restricts evictions.

                      Why not? Because such legislation would be unpopular. Because it would powerfully illustrate that, contrary to hard-Left anti-property dogma, the people being crushed by the moratorium are small-business owners who can’t pay their mortgages and other bills because the (mostly modest) rental payments on which they depend have been suspended by the government.

                    2. Olly says, “You and your ilk on this blog have this narcissistic view that it is Turley that has moved away from you and he somehow owes you an explanation as to why.”

                      I’ll bet you $10,000 that Turley is not a Trumpist. The only reason that I can’t prove how wrong you are in thinking you have more in common with him than I is due to the fact that he cannot be questioned by us! Turley has not moved away from me; he has signed on with Fox News, and as a result, he has to do its bidding for his paycheck.

                      Like me, he believes in the rule of law unlike Trumpists. Turley never has and never will call criminal investigations “hoaxes” or criminal prosecutions “witch-hunts.” Such Trumpist accusations are anathema to a person who has devoted his professional life to the law. Turley often acknowledges that there are good faith arguments on both sides of a controversial issue. Trumpists NEVER do.

                    3. The only reason that I can’t prove how wrong you are in thinking you have more in common with him than I is due to the fact that he cannot be questioned by us!

                      NPD is strong with this one.

                      🤣 if you had more in common with him than I, you would align with his public statements like the Conservatives on this blog already do. Clearly you can’t prove that to be true, which explains your desperation to question his presumed hidden agenda.

                      The irony lost on you however is if you can somehow prove him to be a constitutional fraud, that has sold his soul for personal gain, then you would prove you and Turley actually do have a whole lot more in common than myself and the other Conservatives on this blog.

                      I like my chances. 😀

                    4. What is NPD?

                      Put up or shut up. Do you have $10,000?

                      I have never said that Turley has a hidden agenda. I have said that his agenda is opposed to Trumpism. You’ll see that more clearly as more facts emerge about Trump’s corruption. Eventhough Fox News may not report on the damning testimony to be revealed by the 1/6 commission, Turley will have to do so in order to maintain his credibility. Unlike you Trumpists, however, he will not call it a “witch-hunt” and that will infuriate you.

                      Turley made a bad bet working for Fox, and I suspect that is dawning on him now that Levin is implicitly smearing Leftists/Liberals like him as “American Marxists” and Carlson is championing strongman Victor Orban, not to mention the defamation lawsuit against Fox for promoting the Big Lie which Turley is too embarrassed to ever mention even once in any of his articles.

                    5. LOL! Shocker, you don’t know what NPD is. Classic.

                      It’s obvious you’re whistling past the graveyard regarding JT. If you two were as aligned as your wish-casting would indicate, you wouldn’t be trembling as you are just imagining sending him a private email. Grow a spine.

                    6. I have not ruled out emailing Turley. I’m considering it. I really don’t want to bother the man. I have a feeling that he is more aware of this blog than we know. Maybe I’ll simply email my email address to him, and invite him to reply to me if he has anything he wants to tell me. In this way, I am not imposing upon him unless he requests to learn what is bugging me!

                      I just hope, Olly, that you won’t abandon this blog when my prediction comes true that the majority of you Trumpists will turn on Turley when he does not validate your vilification of the criminal justice system for prosecuting the Trump Organization, Trump associates and lawyers and perhaps even Trump himself.

                      Don’t be a poor sport and deprive me of my getting the last laugh…

              2. Jeff, I am glad that Turley now has a pathway for your ” get out of jail free” card. I am not going to relitigate that obvious biases of outlets like cnn and msnbc. They all play to their base. And as far as blacking out controversies, care to comment on the virtual blackout of the disaster that is occurring on our Southern boarder? I routinely tune in to cnn and have not heard a peep. Maybe just watching at the wrong time? I also read the NYT and WaPo. Virtually nothing.

                1. Paul,

                  You are correct that the *leading* story on Fox is the open arms welcoming of millions of Covid-carrying immigrants freely spreading the virus all through the South accounting for the spike in cases among Trumpists. True, I have not heard a whisper of it on MSNBC prime time.

                  There are one of 2 possibilities: First, Fox is sensationalizing a story to avoid going on the defensive in reporting on the recent Trump DOJ revelations. In addition, the border issue plays well to its audience’s fears and has the added bonus of discrediting Democrats. Second, there is an actual crisis at the border and MSNBC is covering it up.

                  What do I know? How can I know the truth? Unlike Trumpists on this blog, I have my doubts. I’m not ashamed to admit that I am in no position to know the truth. But I trust MSNBC ten times more than I do Fox. The networks rely upon the viewer putting their trust in them because they can’t know when the network is misleading them.

                  You are correct that each network plays to their base. Since Trumpists are liars for telling me that Trump is honest, I refuse to believe the reporting by a network which serves the Trumpist mentality.

    4. “Extending the moratorium only makes sense.”

      Yes it does — if, following Marxism, you believe in the “abolition of private property.”

      1. Oh come on Sam, you’ll still have private property, just only what the government tells you that you need. Relax.

        1. “Relax.”

          Thank you for that Zen wisdom. I guess I just need to keep chanting: “It’s for the greater good. My puny desires are meaningless. I will be assimilated.”

          1. You’re so very welcome.

            My puny desires are meaningless.

            As a good member of the collective, you’ll eventually cease having even the puniest of desires and simply be content with whatever you have. Trust me. 😉

  5. The left could care less about “constitutionality”.

    Why worry about antiquated notions of constitutionality when fighting for fairness?

    According to BLM and their ilk, the US Constitution was adopted by bigots and should be reinterpreted according to their notion of social justice.

    Just wait until the Constitution is interpreted according to CRT. Your rights (or lack thereof) will depend on your victimhood status.

    And mainstream “conservatives” are worse than useless when they treat the constitution as a holy relic and state “we just need to go back to the constitution” as if it had some agreed meaning. It only means what the larger society holds it to mean. And we are on the losing side of that due to immigration and demographic change.

    Brace yourself folks, it’s only going to get worse. We ain’t voting ourselves out of this one.

    I want a divorce.


    1. By any means neccessary… we ain’t got to show you no stinkin’ constitution. (/sarc off)

  6. This policy will lead to a massive rental shortage, and slums.

    The landlord still has to pay the property taxes, utilities, and upkeep, only they can’t collect the unpaid rent. They can’t evict the non paying tenant, which means they can’t sell the property to get rid of the headache, either.

    This is going to discourage anyone from renting out a house instead of just selling it, or from buying a rental property as an investment.

    Years ago, my grandparents rented out their property to help pay for medical bills. These are the kind of people this policy would completely ruin.

    Once again, the government is picking winners and losers. Owners of rental properties have to pay money so that their tenants can live there for free, until or unless they lose the property to foreclosure for non payment of mortgage or property taxes.

    The government should have assisted those financially impacted by the pandemic to pay their rent, not stick landowners with the bill, as if they were some bourgeoisie villain.

    Here Democrats come to wreck the day, impoverish people, and create housing shortages. Again.

    1. Karen again proving she knows nothing. If the moratorium isn’t extended and the evictions start, there will be crowded court dockets, so if you have a small claims matter, it won’t get heard for months and months because evictions have priority. There will be massive homelessness, with shelter space stretched to the limit. There will be a glut of rental units on the market and no one to fill them, and social welfare agencies will be overwhelmed trying to process claims. Tenants getting evicted may not be able to find quality housing because eviction is a black mark on their credit. Since Karen is so concerned about landlords, what do you think this would do to the rental housing market? Properties still couldn’t get sold because there would be no available tenants to rent them, but property taxes and utilities would still have to be paid, so there will still be losses. But… all Karen sees is people getting something for nothing, which isn’t the case. The majority of the COVID relief rental assistance funds are in bureaucratic limbo because states, especially Republican states, have done little to nothing to expedite processing claims or reaching out to those who could use the help that is there. In the pathetic red state where I live only 10% of COVID rental assistance relief funds have been paid out. An extension to process more claims makes economic and humanitarian sense.

      Did you happen to notice that Biden said that extending the moratorium would buy time for COVID relief funds to get processed? This is because most of the rental assistance funds haven’t been spent yet in other red states, but the money is there.

      But, as usual, she tries to blame Democrats. Again. She doesn’t put any blame on her fat hero who allowed the pandemic to get out of control causing people to lose their jobs or the Republicans who are not trying to get COVID relief help to people who lost their jobs because of the pandemic.

      1. An extension to process more claims makes economic and humanitarian sense.

        In summation your honor, so what if it’s unconstitutional, blah, blah, blah reasons. F*ck property rights, Red states blah, blah, blah. Fat hero, blah, blah, blah.

        That’s quite a compelling rant you made counselor. Your big Con Law theory is not the same as Constitutional Law theory.

        Try again.

        1. Olly, I fondly remember when Democrats howled at Trump for wanting to close the border and stop travel between the US and China. This allowed Covid to pour in. Now they’ve thrown open the borders to more than 1 million illegal immigrants, again, allowing Covid to pour in. BP has stated that they can’t test everyone, can’t quarantine everyone. They are just getting released.

          Meanwhile, most Western nations have shut their borders tight. I’m pretty sure Australia has set Great Whites patrolling. They want to reduce the influx of contagion.

          I’ve noticed, too, that the Left could care less about the hardships they cause others. Can’t get cancer treatment, because Obamacare is not accepted at most major cancer treatment centers? Stop complaining, or you don’t care about the poor! Losing your property because the government won’t let you evict tenants, and you can’t pay the property taxes and mortgage, when it should have just helped them pay their rent, stop complaining or you don’t care about the poor! Did your business burn down by BLM rioters? What a racist you are for complaining! Are you trapped inside the autonomous zone, CHOP, and you’d really like the police to come assist the man who’s been shot on your doorstep? Stop complaining, you fascist!

          Honestly, they could flip a coin and arrive at better decisions. They have no compassion for anyone their policies harm. No attempt to understand any criticism and make things right. It’s always agree or you’re evil and we’ll picket, cancel, riot, burn your business, and make sure you never work again you bourgeoise.

          This reminds me of the awakening of Bill Maher. He’s getting red pilled. I await the day he discovers he’s a Libertarian, not an Illiberal. Or will he slide back into unconsciousness?

          1. Honestly, they could flip a coin and arrive at better decisions.

            Absolutely. Had we not elected a President and put the executive branch on autopilot, they’d have done less harm. Oh, but that would be unconstitutional. 🤔 🤣

            1. Olly, I’ve been saying this for a long time. The legislative branch doesn’t legislate. The nation runs on executive orders from the president and rulings handed to us from the many bureaucrats and their bureaus. The country is on auto pilot. Isn’t it grand that we don’t have to worry about the workings of our government.

              1. Isn’t it grand that we don’t have to worry about the workings of our government.

                Sure Bob. The sooner us serfs realize the enlightenment experiment was a dismal failure, the sooner we will no longer be burdened with the pursuit of happiness. Once we are all settled into our self-incurred tutelage, (Kant) we won’t have to be bothered to think about what the aristocratic class is or is not doing. They’ll tell us and we’ll like it.

          2. First of all, no President can “close the border”. You don’t even know what this means. There are Americans who work in Mexico and Mexicans who work in the US who cross every single day. There are Americans, like Ted Cruz, who vacation in Mexico and who need to return home. Biden has not “throw open” the border–that’s another alt-right lie you keep repeating. There is a huge surge because Trump was abducting children from their parents and incarcerating them. Biden stopped doing this, so more of them have come. The laws on immigration haven’t changed. What is Biden supposed to do with these people? Mexico doesn’t want them, and the more of them that come, the more of them will keep coming because they have families here who have running water, cable TV, better schools, better health care, better food, a better life all-around, but the US doesn’t owe a better life to South Americans. Notice that most of them aren’t Mexicans–they are Venezuelans, Guatemalans, Hondurans and other South Americans because so many US factory jobs were exported to Mexico. Those entering will be subject to hearings to see whether they qualify for asylum. If they don’t, they go back, but they just keep returning. No President has been successful in stopping illegal immigration, but the best start would be to take away jobs, which is the main reason they come here–severely punish those who hire those who cannot produce documentation; after getting caught a couple of times, mandatory jail time and revocation of all licenses to operate businesses. Republicans won’t stand for this because it is the large hotel and restaurant chains, non-union construction companies, housekeeping and nanny services and landscaping companies that mostly hire illegals. They’ll work for whatever they an get, and won’t complain if they aren’t paid overtime, they don’t make sexual harassment or workers comp claims, and don’t demand benefits. Illegals are good for business–cheap labor. It’s the people who hire the illegals that are the root cause of the problem. Enforce and toughen the laws for hiring illegals, and that will go a long way towards solving the problem. But, you can’t blame Democrats or Biden. Republicans have more of the blame because their business constituents are the ones who are benefitting financially from illegals, and they are providing the incentive to come here.

            I simply don’t believe your claim that major cancer centers won’t accept Obamacare. Maybe your alt-right media sources omitted this fact, but in addition to the moratorium on evictions, there is a moratorium on forelosures, too. The reason many renters became unemployed is because of the pandemic. There are relief funds available, and in 26 states (all Republican-run) 90% of the funds haven’t even been spent. Republicans have done very little to expedite the application and approval process. Even if a renter in arrears on rent got a job today, and paid August rent, they could still get evicted for back-rent. Extending the moratorium benefits renters and landlords alike.

            Why do you keep whining about the rioting, which was over long ago? Why aren’t you more concerned about the Trump Insurrection in January, and the second one he’s tried to get started in August?

            1. I’m sure it was just an oversight, but you forgot to mention:

              Some 1 million unvaccinated immigrants during a pandemic. That policy is from an administration allegedly motivated to end the pandemic.

              Of course, if you embrace contradictions, such a barefaced one won’t bother you.

      2. it won’t get heard for months and months because evictions have priority. There will be massive homelessness

        You are an idiot that doesn’t even know about incentives.
        There are 9 million job openings. Throughout the entire salary scale. If you no longer are getting a hand out, you NEED to go to work.

  7. Because we must get back to the righteous practice of killing the poorest among us in the streets!!!

    “Yet, imagine if a Republican president announced that he was told that an order on drilling or subsidizing a religious organization was unconstitutional but would use litigation to get the money out before a court could intervene. ”

    Seems like standard Repub strategy to me.



  8. “[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”

    – James Madison

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

    – Declaration of Independence, 1776


    American citizens are the Sovereign; government is the Subject of that Sovereign.

    American citizens aren’t asking the judicial branch, American citizens are telling the judicial branch.

    Read and support the literal “manifest tenor” of the Constitution, you buffoons.

    Do your single, solitary and sworn duty.

    Americans don’t need a court of law for eviction moratoria to be unconstitutional.

    Eviction moratoria are innately unconstitutional, malicious and criminal.

    The sole entity with power to “claim and exercise dominion” over private property is the owner of the related private property.

    Courts, judges and Justices, sympathetic to the plights of parasites, are free to contribute to the charity industry in the free markets of the private sector or otherwise transfer their assets to designated beneficiaries.

    The courts, themselves, are unconstitutional, and Justices and judges must be impeached, convicted and severely penalized for abuse of power, usurpation of legislative and executive power, dereliction of duty and treason.

    The judicial branch has no legislative or executive power or authority.

    The judicial branch must, simply and merely, void all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    That Justices and judges harbor an overwhelming desire for and vigorously seek personal power, does not provide them dominion and omnipotence.

    The 5th Amendment right to private property exists, therefore it is absolute.

    The 5th Amendment right to private property is a right of citizens, not a right, exerciseable option or possession of the judicial branch.

    If the right to private property may be abrogated in part, it may be abrogated in full. and it may not be abrogated in any measure.

    If the right to private property is not absolute, it does not exist.

    One cannot be half pregnant.

    The right to private property cannot be half absolute.

    The Constitution does not qualify the right to private property and the right to private property is, therefore, absolute.


    “…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”

    “…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”

    “[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

    – Alexander Hamilton

  9. The Democrats’ notion of ethics and law is strictly situational, that is, they have no true principles and make decisions based on the current political climate. The extremist flank of the Democratic party was making too big a public display over the moratorium, and the Dems just can’t afford bad press (not that they ever get much bad press in their liberal-owned media). The extremist flank is vocal, rowdy, and can stir up the low-life sector of the Democratic base, and this scares the moderates. When faced with a choice between violating the Constitution or angering the BLM/Antifa mob, well, it’s a no brainer if you’re a Democrat.

  10. About to expire?! They have one job to do. It’s bad enough that our citizens need to defend themselves against unconstitutional laws, policies and regulations by navigating the oftentimes costly lower courts, but when SCOTUS decides to knowingly uphold unconstitutional laws, policies and regulations, they are no longer acting in a judicial capacity, but rather as a servant to the other two branches of government.

    I agree with the District Court and the applicants that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium.

    As SCOTUS, do they need to do more? Nope. But apparently they are the super-SCOTUS with perceived powers not defined:

    Because the CDC plans to end the moratorium in only a few weeks, on July 31, and because those few weeks will allow for additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance funds, I vote at this time to deny the application to vacate the District Court’s stay of its order.

    Perhaps it’s a good thing they declined to take on any of the violations of election laws that were done for “pandemic” reasons. Yes, I agree with the applicants that the state exceeded its existing statutory authority by ignoring state election laws, but they had reasons.

    What other reasons might they use to uphold unconstitutional acts?

  11. Roberts’ and Kavanaugh’s position on Alabama Realtors is the Roberts position on everything: try to do the “right” thing but conditioned on the higher priority to never take a clear stand on anything controversial with the New York Times’ of the world. History will not be kind, regardless of which side writes it.

    This is a great example of why that is bad–a clear decision in Alabama Realtors would have directed the District Courts to summarily void Biden’s diktat. Lacking a real decision, new cases will now have to spend 2 more years getting to the Supreme Court in 2024 or so, and who can say how that court will decide?

    Roberts is a disaster compared to W’s other appointee (Alito), and people W might have appointed; though, W’s long dalliance with Harriet Miers should disabuse us of the idea W was a real legal conservative–maybe Roberts was his baseline and we were just lucky with Alito.

    Anyway, we crossed the “constitutional” Rubicon with Obama’s DACA orders, if not long before. Compare what is going on, now (including denial of bail to Jan. 6 rioters suspected of nothing more than misdemeanor trespass), to Jefferson agonizing over whether the Constitution gave the govt the enumerated power to purchase territory (Louisiana).

    1. Biden has all but declared the Constitution void and himself Dictator. At least Mussolini made the trains run on time but all Biden has done is destroy any notion of America existing as a free state while pandering to his Marxist Democrat base. Or maybe it is really that leftist cabal behind the Biden curtain. The pathetic main stream Republicans, 17 of them, seem content to go along to get along. Just following orders I suppose. Biden should send a thank you note to Kavanaugh, he couldn’t have put that nail into democracy without him.

  12. Here’s a clear case for impeachment. The problem is getting: 1. Control of House; 2. Electing someone beside McCarthy; 3. Getting rid of Harris; 4. Forcing senators to vote on preserving the constitution.

    #3 is the biggest problem.

  13. You all know, of course, that Joe is not in charge. His handlers are doing what THEY want to do. When the House changes leadership in January 2023, if Joe is still “in charge”, he will be impeached for a myriad of items, this being one. If Kammie is seated in the chair, she gets impeached for being in charge of the border, which is in itself a huge can of worms. She and Joe are not “enforcing the laws of the United States”. People need to be held accountable, if it were Republicans you know what would be happening, all hell would be breaking loose on their heads.

    1. [if it were Republicans you know what would be happening, all hell would be breaking loose on their heads.]

      You’re so full of bovine excreta the whites of your eyes are most likely brown.

      It’s been nearly 50 years since any Congress had the intellect or independence to exercise its Constitution obligation. One must admire the “integrity” of our legislative branch of government. Once these twits and twats of every stripe and gender are “bought, they stay “bought”. Particularly when the currency is shekels.

  14. Biden’s action is clearly wrong but not surprising given the political pressure on him. The main fault here lies with Justice Kavanaugh. What about his oath? He should now have learned that giving a pass to “temporary” constitutional violations is not a good legal or practical approach. Hopefully, he will abide by his oath and do his job next time.

      1. See, the above is what happens when a repub president dedicates four years to watering the dumb ass tree.

  15. If anyone thought Biden was going to support the US Constitution, they were/are either blind or foolish.

  16. Since the “state” enacted the moratorium how is it possible or even fair that landlords are required to pay real estate taxes to the “state”? How about insurance? How about mortgages?

  17. Makes little sense because there are so many job openings going unfilled and yet Biden doesn’t seem to be aware that many people are in fact taking advantage of what they can. Landlords though have to keep paying taxes and maintenance. How are they supposed to do that? And Congress adjourned for a long summer vacation so this just seems to be simply a stunt.

    1. It assumes facts not in evidence. SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan) was never a threat to the general population. 80% of cases were in “fat is beautiful”, “healthy at any weight”, and others sold on “no judgment”, “no labels”, of population pandemics past, present, and likely progressive. The Delta (Indian) variant is more transmissible, but less deadly, comparable to the seasonal flu. Ironically, the mutation likely evolved through the distribution of the vaccines to the general population (the majority of whom were already immune or resistant to infection and disease progression), and fully vaccinated individuals per Britain, Israel et al, are at six times greater risk of dying and spreading (e.g. suppressed symptoms, greater viral titers) to others. Then there are the masks and the failed hope for droplet spread that would at least assure marginal utility.

Leave a Reply