Court Rules on CDC Covid Lawsuit

In a significant ruling on Wednesday, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that a takings lawsuit against the federal eviction moratorium enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic can move forward. This decision overturns a May 2022 dismissal by the US Court of Claims, which argued that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) moratorium was not properly authorized, thus negating any claims of property seizure. Judge Sharon Prost, writing for the majority, emphasized that even an illegal seizure could be considered an "authorized" taking if it is attributable to the government. The ruling draws on precedents indicating that actions taken by government agents within the scope of their duties, even without explicit statutory authority, can still qualify for takings claims. The court noted that the CDC acted in good faith under a presidential directive, which complicates the argument against the legitimacy of the eviction moratorium. The majority opinion raises concerns about the implications of this ruling, suggesting it could lead to increased liability for government agencies engaging in similar programs. Critics argue that this could deter the implementation of legitimate government initiatives due to fears of takings claims. The court also debated whether the CDC's actions fell within its normal duties, a key factor in determining the authorization of the taking. This case may be subject to further review by the en banc Federal Circuit or the Supreme Court, which could establish important precedents regarding the nature of takings and the legality of eviction moratoria.