Eviction Moratoriums: History and Landlord Impact
Eviction moratoriums are government-issued orders that temporarily suspend or restrict a landlord's legal ability to remove tenants from rental housing. These measures have appeared at the federal, state, and municipal levels, most prominently during the COVID-19 pandemic but also in response to natural disasters and housing crises. The scope of any given moratorium — who it covers, how long it lasts, and what landlord remedies it affects — varies significantly by jurisdiction and statutory authority. Understanding how these orders are structured, and how they have historically affected rental property operations, is essential for landlord professionals navigating compliance obligations.
Definition and scope
An eviction moratorium is a legally binding order that halts eviction proceedings for a defined class of tenants during a specified period. These orders differ from rent forgiveness programs: the debt obligation typically remains; the moratorium only restricts the procedural remedy of eviction. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), under 42 U.S.C. § 264, issued the most widely recognized federal moratorium in September 2020, ultimately extended through August 26, 2021, before the U.S. Supreme Court vacated it in Alabama Association of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Services (2021).
Moratoriums operate at three distinct jurisdictional levels:
- Federal — Issued by a federal agency under emergency statutory authority (e.g., the CDC order under the Public Health Service Act).
- State — Enacted by governors through executive order or by state legislatures; California, New York, and New Jersey maintained state-level protections extending beyond the federal order.
- Local/Municipal — Enacted by city councils or county boards; Los Angeles County, for example, maintained a local moratorium on no-fault evictions through March 31, 2023 (Los Angeles County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs).
The landlord provider network purpose and scope reference context covers how regulatory variation by jurisdiction affects the professional landscape across property management.
How it works
When a moratorium is in effect, the standard eviction process — notice to quit, unlawful detainer filing, court hearing, writ of possession — is suspended or blocked at one or more stages. The specific mechanism depends on whether the moratorium is self-executing (tenants must affirmatively invoke protection) or automatic.
Under the CDC's 2020 order, tenants were required to submit a signed declaration to their landlord asserting eligibility. Eligible tenants had to meet income thresholds — annual income at or below $99,000 (or $198,000 for joint filers), verified inability to pay rent, and risk of homelessness if evicted (CDC Federal Eviction Moratorium Declaration Form, 2020).
State-issued moratoriums frequently operated automatically, with no tenant declaration required. Under California's COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act (AB 3088, 2020), nonpayment evictions were restricted statewide, and courts were prohibited from issuing unlawful detainer judgments for COVID-related rental debt through specific protected periods (California Courts, AB 3088 Summary).
Enforcement mechanisms include:
- Court-level stays — Clerks refuse to accept or process eviction filings during the moratorium period.
- Judicial dismissal — Judges dismiss cases filed in violation of moratorium terms.
- Civil penalties — Landlords who proceed with illegal lockouts or utility shutoffs face civil liability; some jurisdictions impose statutory damages of 1 to 3 times monthly rent per violation.
- Criminal exposure — A subset of state and local codes classify illegal eviction during a moratorium as a misdemeanor.
Common scenarios
Non-payment of rent (COVID-related): The most common application. Federal and state moratoriums generally protected tenants who could demonstrate a COVID-related financial hardship. Landlords retained the ability to issue notices but could not proceed to court judgment or physical removal.
Non-payment of rent (non-COVID): Some moratoriums explicitly excluded tenants who had no COVID connection to their nonpayment. Courts in states including Texas and Florida distinguished COVID-related hardship from general inability to pay, limiting the moratorium's scope.
No-fault evictions: Moratoriums in California, New York, and Los Angeles specifically restricted no-fault evictions — such as owner move-in or unit renovation — independent of whether the tenant was current on rent. This category represented a significant departure from pre-pandemic eviction law and created distinct operational constraints for landlords seeking to recover possession for property upgrades.
Month-to-month lease non-renewal: In jurisdictions where moratoriums covered lease non-renewals, landlords operating under standard residential lease frameworks could not terminate month-to-month tenancies even with proper statutory notice.
Post-moratorium debt collection: Once moratoriums expired, the accumulated unpaid rent became collectible. The federal Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP), administered through the U.S. Department of the Treasury, disbursed over $46 billion authorized under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to assist both tenants and landlords with arrears (U.S. Department of the Treasury, ERA Program).
Decision boundaries
Distinguishing what a moratorium covers — and what it does not — determines the legal risk profile for any eviction action during a protected period.
| Factor | Covered by most moratoriums | Not covered |
|---|---|---|
| Reason for eviction | Nonpayment of rent | Criminal activity, lease violations unrelated to rent |
| Tenant eligibility | Income-qualified tenants with hardship declaration | Tenants above income threshold |
| Lease type | Residential tenancies | Commercial leases (generally excluded) |
| Property type | Most residential rentals | Some owner-occupied duplexes or triplexes |
The Supreme Court's 2021 ruling in Alabama Association of Realtors established that the CDC's authority under 42 U.S.C. § 264 did not extend to nationwide eviction prohibition, creating a boundary on federal administrative reach. State constitutional authority, by contrast, remains substantially broader: state police powers have been upheld as sufficient basis for housing emergency orders in federal circuit court decisions interpreting the Contract Clause and Takings Clause.
Landlords facing ambiguous moratorium coverage are governed by the most restrictive applicable instrument — meaning a local order that is narrower in scope than a state order but more protective of tenants takes precedence within that locality. Federal preemption only applies where Congress has expressly occupied the field, which has not occurred in landlord-tenant law.