One of the absolute worst aspects of the entire CoVid-19 situation has been the massive government overreach that bureaucrats (who are overwhelmingly politically liberal. No surprise, there.) have made Americans suffer under. Lockdowns, mask mandates, attempts to force people to receive experimental vaccines. It’s alarming.
One of the groups who have suffered the most from this overreach has been small business owners and landlords. You know, the people who shell out their own money to purchase and make livable buildings for other people to live in. Those other people being people who don’t want to put out that money (or haven’t, yet, found a way to put together that financing).
Those landlords provide a service to people that no one is required to use, and those landlords have bills to pay, too, like mortgages on those properties and, in many cases, some or all utilities and any and all repairs on the properties. So, if they aren’t receiving income, that puts them in an incredibly difficult situation.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) didn’t seem to care about that reality, though. Fortunately, a court recently took the CDC to task for their massive power grab. Jack Phillips writes,
A federal court on Friday ruled that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) overstepped its authority by halting evictions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Cincinnati-based U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously agreed […] with a lower court ruling that said the CDC engaged in federal overreach with the eviction moratorium, which the agency has consistently extended for months. Several weeks ago, the CDC announced it would allow the policy, which was passed into law by Congress, to expire at the end of July.
“It is not our job as judges to make legislative rules that favor one side or another,” the judges wrote. “But nor should it be the job of bureaucrats embedded in the executive branch. While landlords and tenants likely disagree on much, there is one thing both deserve: for their problems to be resolved by their elected representatives.”
The ruling upheld one handed down by U.S. District Judge Mark Norris, who in March blocked enforcement of the moratorium throughout western Tennessee.
These judges are exactly right: unelected bureaucrats have no business interfering in the personal business of private business people, especially when that interference is pushing those business people to bankruptcy in some cases.
I would argue that no branch of government should interfere in private businesses for any reason. Those businesses are all based on voluntary interactions, and, therefore, it’s simply not the government’s business.
Hopefully, those power-hungry bureaucrats will get the clue and stop trying to control everyone else.