DRUG POLICY IS A FAIR EXCHANGE FOR GETTING SUBSIDIZED HOUSING

In the war on drugs, public safety trumps the risk of penalizing innocent
people, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. On Tuesday, justices
unanimously upheld a strict federal law allowing tenants to be ousted from
public housing if any family member or guest is connected to illegal drug
activity.

Four California senior citizens challenged the law after receiving eviction
notices because of the drug use of relatives or caregivers. Despite
diligent efforts to keep people from bringing drugs into their apartments,
the residents said they couldn't control the actions of others outside the
apartments.

In one case, a resident was to be kicked out after her mentally disabled
adult daughter was arrested for crack cocaine near their public housing
complex. In another instance, a disabled resident was notified of eviction
after his caregiver was arrested for drugs.

The court ruled 8-0 that public housing officials could evict entire
families for drug use by one member, regardless of whether the use was on
public housing property or if anyone else knew about it. Justice Stephen
Breyer did not take part in the housing ruling.

In the court's decision, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist quoted Congress
by saying that "with drugs leading to murders, muggings, and other forms of
violence against tenants," aggressive eviction policies are reasonable. The
rule, he said, was compatible with Congress' desire to end "the reign of
terror" in public housing.

Critics have argued the so-called "one-strike" housing provision unfairly
targets the poor who depend on public housing. Congress passed the law in
1988 amid complaints about crime in public housing.

While the law allows public housing officials to evict residents whose
family members are involved with illegal drugs, it does not require them to
take such action. Housing directors have the authority to consider whether
the resident was blameless in the incident, and, if so, the punishment can
be lenient. In fact, the resident whose disabled daughter was arrested for
drugs was allowed to stay in public housing once her daughter was no longer
living in the apartment.

Like any landlord, public housing officials have a legal obligation to take
adequate steps to protect the safety of their residents -- whether it's
installing adequate lighting in public areas, making sure housing units are
kept up to building codes or removing tenants who pose a threat to other
residents. As a condition of their lease, public housing residents across
the country agree to follow certain rules or risk eviction. One of those
rules is to not allow illegal drugs into their apartment or house someone
in the apartment who uses drugs.

Some people may see this anti-drug rule as unduly harsh or restrictive, but
we don't think it's unreasonable for residents to have to take an active
role in making sure the people they bring into the public housing community
aren't engaging in illegal drug activities. When the public safety of a
neighborhood is at risk, residents shouldn't be allowed to ignore drug
problems or feign ignorance -- not if they want the privilege of living in
government-subsidized housing. And, if residents aren't willing to be
pro-active and responsible, we're certain many of the families on waiting
lists for public housing would be.