Nope, banning pretty much all rentals.

I studied the order. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/04/2020-19654/temporary-halt-in-residential-evictions-to-prevent-the-further-spread-of-covid-19

The reasoning behind the order is that if a tenant is evicted and homeless there is likelihood of spreading covid-19.  Therefore the ideal would be banning all eviction.  It would not make sense just to ban eviction based on mortgage status.  If so, the CDC order would be easily challenged in court for being arbitrary.  

However, the CDC said if your income is higher than $99,000, they assume you are unlikely to be homeless even if evicted, so in their order they banned eviction for those tenants income less than $99,000.  That's the only meaningful qualification.  

 

所有跟帖： 

• +1 我也是这么认为。除非不是以欠租的名义驱逐。 -古来万事- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/11/2020 postreply 14:58:14

• +1 -pangpangxiongxiong- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/11/2020 postreply 16:22:24

• 今天填的第一张纸就是类似于上次的房子是不是政府背书的贷款，多了张第 -MrsKwok- ♀ (598 bytes) () 09/11/2020 postreply 15:12:40

• 多谢柠檬大拿解释！！看来以后找房客只能找码工码婆了，确保年薪十万以上LOL -luckyme888- ♀ (0 bytes) () 09/11/2020 postreply 22:17:41