The California Supreme Court has left intact a court ruling that limits how far cities can go in regulating rents, preserving a key victory for the California Apartment Association against the city of Pasadena.

The Court of Appeal’s ruling will remain in place and available for courts to cite after the California Supreme Court denied petitions for review and requests to depublish the opinion.

As previously reported, the Court of Appeal ruled that Pasadena cannot require housing providers to pay relocation assistance when tenants move out after a lawful rent increase on units not subject to local rent control. The court concluded that this rent-increase-triggered mandate conflicts with the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act.

After the Court of Appeal declined to revisit its decision, Pasadena and tenant advocates asked the California Supreme Court to review the case. They also urged the court to depublish the key portion of the opinion if review were denied, which would have prevented other courts from relying on the ruling as precedent.

The court on Monday, April 1, 2026, denied both the petitions for review and the depublication requests. The court did not issue a written opinion explaining its decision.

The outcome means the Court of Appeal’s opinion remains published and may continue to be cited by courts and litigants addressing similar local ordinances.

The decision was already beginning to shape other disputes. In Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles County v. City of Los Angeles, a pending challenge to the city’s rent-increase-triggered relocation mandate, the Court of Appeal requested supplemental briefing on how the Pasadena ruling affects the legality of Los Angeles’ ordinance, signaling the decision’s relevance in ongoing litigation.

CAA had argued that review and depublication were unwarranted because the appellate court simply applied settled state preemption principles to a new factual setting. Tenant advocacy groups, by contrast, had urged the high court to review the case and warned that the ruling could affect a wide range of ordinances beyond Pasadena.

The Supreme Court’s action brings this phase of the case to a close and preserves an important precedent reinforcing the limits state law places on local rent regulation.