Person stands up to HUD Claim Un-American Act
Advocate Jan, 23.01.2013
For two decades, finger pointing of wrong doing, is enough to get tenants evicted. NO Hearing, No defense permitted. Now the program HUD - paying low income rent, Section 8, vouchers,and projects, says it can evict for legal actions also.
Along comes Advocate Jan,asking leaders to stop this act.
This is on open letter from advocate Jan who went from more than 30 years of direct services to the Homeless and poor to addressing the cause of those agonies. From Maine to CA. all whose income is low enough to depend upon HUD paying up to 2/3 of their rent are held as if without rights. This letter addressess a regulation designed to keep HGUD tenants free of Drug Dealers. Only dealers can relocate their business or afford a lawyer. Project renters or free standing renters can not afford attorneies. They are easy targets. And HUD can say it is activily "Protecting" other tenants.
As a person who worked in the homeless field for 30 years who now am focusing upon the causes of homelessness. I write This office about your regulation. First, I want a copy of the regulation which for decades has been wrongly used to displaced residents of HUD. The one accusation of drug use, use of freedom of speech, any misdeanor, and you lose your housing.
This is a regulation which many advocates thinks is immoral and I allege is illegally unconstitutional.
The reason I claim the once up to bat or one charge of wrongdoing is in violation of the 14th amendment are simply:
1) There is no forum to raise innocence as a due process defense.
If according to Constitutional Law Key 309(1) It reads basically that a state(or in this case a federal agency) can not exercise jurisdiction of an individual “unless the defendant has sufficient minimum contact with a forum ,” a redress, to defend against the wrongful indictment, you are in violation of the constitution. Your office, or the regulation, allows NO Defense before the low income renter loses their lifetime benefit.
And in the same case it also found ‘the government action must not violate traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,’ requiring removal of the tenant before trail on any charge is lacking any perception of justice. AZ. Coast to coast Marketing Co. Inc. v. G&S Metal Products Co. Inc. 637P.d 308
In one case in CA the tenant was not himself the alleged person doing wrong. It was his care taker. No due process hearing was given the 80 to 90 year old. He was out before the care taker could prove her innocence in a court of law. In another case a financially deprived elderly New Orleans advocate was given an eviction notice and fought it. The law she was alleged of braking was along the lines of disturbing the peace, when she practiced her 1st amendment free speech right in a peaceful rally. She refused to move and she kept her HUD benefit.
Often the abused renter is told they can reapply if they do not cause a hassle. But in fact across this nation, I have yet to hear of one such evictee being placed back upon the HUD program. And if older folks were, they would die before moving to the head of the line.
2. would “a person of common intelligence be forced to guess at the regulation meaning,? And differ as to its application?’ Watkins v Roach Cadillac Inc., 637 P.2d 458. When this regulation is used against people whose state has legalized use of medical marijuana as Maine and Colorado has reasonable people differ if using this accuse to remove tenants, is legal, or just an arbitrary show of governments power against the poor. Is HUD officers saying They know better than the state lawmakers what is legal and what is not/ Are they stealing the lawmaking powers, by arbitrarily enforcing they puny regulation against their own renters? Isn’t That the same regulation passed to be used against drug dealers, not their own occupants.
I now have the time, and perhaps the means to fight this tenet which is Un-American. At the least I can help others effectively fight. Medical pot is not illegal, so How arbitrary is it for HUD to use that as a pretense for eviction? Jan