In defiance of Congress, federally-funded legal services lawyers continue
to file lawsuits to stop drug-related evictions from public housing.
Legal Services Defends Tenants in Drug-Related Evictions
Neighborhood Legal Services of Buffalo is currently representing six
public housing tenants who are being evicted because of family members’
involvement in illegal drug activity. For two years, the Lackawanna Municipal
Housing Authority has followed a strict lease policy that holds tenants
responsible for the illegal activities of relatives or guests. Lackawanna,
like housing authorities elsewhere, believes that the most effective way
to combat crime is to evict tenants who allow relatives or visitors to
engage in such behavior. However, Neighborhood Legal Services says that
evicting tenants not directly charged with crimes violates their rights.
“And what about the rights of the other tenants?,” rejoins Charles Barone,
Executive Director of Lackawanna. “They have the right to privacy and to
not have people pounding on the doors at 2 a.m. looking for drugs.” In
addition, says Barone, President Clinton’s recent endorsement of
a “one-strike-and-you’re-out” policy for public housing residents who commit
a crime is a clear endorsement of Lackawanna’s eviction policy.
See Tom Ernst, “Eight Tenants Face Eviction,” The Buffalo News,
May 25, 1996, pg. 5C
Stops Drug-Related Eviction in New Jersey Public Housing
In January 1997, Hudson County Legal Services of New Jersey stopped a drug-related eviction of a tenant from Hoboken public housing. Housing officials initiated eviction proceedings against Carmen Alicea for permitting her son Luis to use her apartment after he had been charged with a drug crime. Under New Jersey’s Comprehensive Drug Reform Act, public housing tenants are subject to eviction if they permit a drug criminal to occupy their housing. However, legal services stopped the eviction on the grounds that the authority did not actually prove that Luis was living in his mother’s apartment -- despite his own admission to police that he did live there.
See Hoboken v. Alicea, A-5639-95T3, NJ Appeals Ct., 1997
Stops Eviction of Woman Arrested for Dealing Crack
In August 1996, Brooklyn Legal Services stopped the eviction of a woman
even though police found 54 vials of crack cocaine during a raid on her
apartment. Following the raid which took place on Christmas Day 1995, the
Clifton Court apartment complex initiated eviction proceedings against
tenant Karen Williams who police arrested along with seven others for drug
dealing. However, Brooklyn Legal Services thwarted the eviction. They argued
that the apartment owners failed to definitively prove that Williams was
dealing drugs despite the discovery of five dozen vials of crack. BLS claimed
that the presence of illegal drugs in Williams apartment -- which was enough
for police to arrest her -- was insufficient to justify her eviction.
See Bill Alden, “Court Blocks Drug-Related Eviction,” New York
Law Journal, August 14, 1996, pg. 1
Stops Drug-Related Eviction from Charlotte Public Housing
In August 1996, Legal Services of Southern Piedmont stopped the eviction
of a Charlotte public housing resident despite strong evidence she was
aiding drug criminals. The case began in 1994 when the Charlotte Housing
Authority initiated eviction proceedings against Martha Fleming following
her son’s arrest for cocaine dealing. Evidence clearly showed that Fleming
had a history of allowing drug criminals to use her residence. In addition,
housing officials argued that Fleming had interfered with police efforts
to combat drug crime in the project. However, after nearly two years
of litigation legal services stopped the eviction claiming that housing
officials failed to prove Fleming knew of her son’s actions the night he
was arrested.
See Charlotte Housing Auth. v. Fleming, 123 N.C. App. 511, 1996
Defends Bayonne Drug Criminal Against Eviction
In 1996, Hudson County Legal Services failed in its attempt to prevent the eviction of a man convicted of illegal drug activity. Between 1992 and 1994, Silas Taylor, a resident of the Bayonne Housing Authority, was twice convicted of possessing illegal drug paraphernalia. After the second conviction, the housing authority initiated eviction proceedings against Taylor under a state law which allows the eviction of public housing tenants involved in drug crimes. However, legal services argued that the eviction was unconstitutional because it violated Eighth amendment prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. A federal district court rejected this claim, ruling that “evicting an insidious tenant is a rational and effective means of protecting” law-abiding tenants from crime. Not giving up, however, legal services lawyers then took the case to a U.S. Appeals Court. There they argued that Taylor's eviction for his drug offenses was unconstitutional because he was being punished a second time, in addition to his criminal conviction. The court rejected the argument as illogical.The court noted that, by legal services’ reasoning, Taylor’s drug conviction would prevent him from ever being evicted, thus allowing him to continue threatening the safety of other tenants.
See Taylor v. Cisneros, 102 F.3d 1334, U.S. App. Ct., 1996