REJECT GUILT BY ASSOCIATION

The U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to free public housing tenants
from one of the most egregiously unfair laws enacted in the "war" on drugs
and crime. Under existing law, any public housing tenant can be evicted if
a family member or guest commits a criminal drug offense -- even if the
tenant had no knowledge of the illegal conduct. Even criminal activity
occurring off the premises is grounds for eviction. It does not matter if
the alleged criminal has been convicted, or even arrested for the supposed
crime. The discretion is left to housing authority officials. Tenants
evicted under this law are ineligible for housing assistance for at least
three years.

The U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to free public housing tenants
from one of the most egregiously unfair laws enacted in the "war" on drugs
and crime. Under existing law, any public housing tenant can be evicted if
a family member or guest commits a criminal drug offense -- even if the
tenant had no knowledge of the illegal conduct. Even criminal activity
occurring off the premises is grounds for eviction. It does not matter if
the alleged criminal has been convicted, or even arrested for the supposed
crime. The discretion is left to housing authority officials. Tenants
evicted under this law are ineligible for housing assistance for at least
three years.

Here are the facts of the case the court decided to hear: Four elderly
public housing residents in Oakland, Calif., faced eviction for the
behavior of children, grandchildren or, in one man's case, a live-in
caretaker. Two courts have ruled in favor of the tenants. A federal
district court held that the law did not apply to offenses committed
outside an apartment without the tenant's knowledge, and the 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. A decision that ratifies the
9th Circuit ruling would invalidate the one-strike policy nationally.

The appeal filed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
argues that the ruling "essentially neutralizes" a law aimed at "ridding
public housing of the scourge" of drugs. While that may be the law's aim,
it clearly overreaches.

The court should deliver an unequivocal message that guilt by association
is not sufficient grounds for tenants to be kicked out of their homes.