Two-minute lawsuits in crowded courtrooms. Ten minute evictions. Incalculable suffering. Before Covid, this was – and has long been – the reality in many eviction courts. But during the pandemic, an influx of federal funds has helped courts initiate dozens of eviction prevention and diversion programs for landlords and tenants. These programs, often in tandem with other reforms, such as remote court hearings and community outreach efforts, are making the eviction court easier to navigate and more accessible.
But funds from the federal Emergency Rental Assistance Program are running out, and there are only a handful of eviction moratoriums in states and cities. The end of the rent and eviction aid comes at the worst possible time: many people will soon face, and in some cases, already face the possibility of being evicted from their homes over the winter, forced out of their homes to live alone. to face the brutal cold during the Omicron Gulf. The benefits of these new programs are in danger of being discontinued, if not completely undone.
While federal funding may have fueled the initial response to the growing eviction crisis, state governments, especially state courts, must continue to prevent eviction and diversion. While many evictions begin outside the state and local courts, many are ultimately completed there. Rather than return to the old ways of churning through eviction cases, courts should use this moment to preserve the pandemic-era programs, practices and partnerships that have helped countless people in the United States.
The wide range of eviction prevention and diversion programs have a common goal: to give all parties – tenants and landlords – the opportunity to have the time and resources to solve their housing problems in the least harmful way. While not every eviction can or should be avoided, every eviction case should be given the attention it deserves. These programs help courts do just that. And by encouraging alternatives to eviction whenever possible, these programs and unprecedented levels of rent assistance helped avert the worst-case scenarios of mass eviction during the height of the pandemic.
Prevention and diversion programs allow courts to serve as a pathway to stability. By holding virtual hearings, proactively sending tenants information about legal and rental assistance, and slowing down the eviction process to give both tenants and landlords time to access those resources, courts ensure that their process is as fair as possible for everyone involved. .
In Texas, the state Supreme Court initiated the first nationwide eviction program. It allows eviction cases to be paused for 60 days, giving participating landlords and tenants time to request rental assistance, and requires information about the program to be included in both English and Spanish in all eviction notices.
In Washington, DC, the Superior Court expanded its existing landlord and tenant utility. It has set up remote access terminals across the city so that litigants can safely and easily participate in virtual court hearings, even if they don’t have the necessary technology at home. The prevention and diversion programs developed during the pandemic have made the once unthinkable possible: due respect for the time and dignity of every litigant.
Such programs have benefited tenants and landlords alike. One success story involves a mother of four in Chicago, who lost her job during the pandemic and fell behind on her rent, and the owner of her building, a recent immigrant who struggled through the legal process to get his property back without a lawyer. and in an unknown language. Without a distraction program, both could have moved on to a process neither of them was prepared for. Instead, they were referred to a new program where, with the help of legal aid and the help of an interpreter, they could quickly settle their case without a trial or eviction notice.
The deportation crisis in America predated the pandemic and will continue even if it has abated. A single eviction case can have far-reaching consequences for a tenant’s financial, educational, and housing stability, as well as the landlord’s ability to maintain his or her property. By looking outside their walls and working with legal aid organisations, mediation centers and other social partners, courts can better address the root causes of eviction and arrive at more sustainable solutions. The federal government has supported these efforts by convening national summits that encourage state and local courts to set up court diversion programs and other creative reform efforts that can mitigate the harm of eviction.
Reducing the damage of eviction: That’s the goal of the new National Center for State Courts eviction initiative. We act as members of the advisory board. The initiative will fund state courts to hire staff to ensure the sustainability of their eviction prevention and diversion work. Coupled with support from states themselves, the initiative could help courts not only preserve but expand their pandemic-era practices and programs.
Examples such as those from Washington, DC, Texas and Chicago show that evacuation and prevention programs can work. They can prevent unnecessary evictions and limit the damage to those who have to move on. They can change the way community members perceive and interact with housing courts. They can make housing courts a point of contact with a wide variety of legal and support services rather than a last resort.
As Winston Churchill is credited with saying, “never let a good crisis be lost.” If courts simply return to their prepandemic practices, they will have done just that.
Anna Blackburne-Rigsby is Chief Justice of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Nathan Hecht is Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court.
The Times is committed to publication a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d love to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are a few tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].
Follow the Opinion section of the DailyExpertNews at: facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
