A federal judge has dismissed the California Apartment Association’s lawsuit challenging Alameda County’s COVID-19 eviction moratorium. While this ruling is disappointing, it clears the way for CAA to pursue an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The lawsuit argued that the county’s eviction ban, which lasted more than three years, inflicted devastating financial losses on housing providers and violated constitutional protections. Earlier rulings had already dismissed CAA’s physical takings, due process, and equal protection claims. With the court’s Aug. 29 decision eliminating the last remaining regulatory takings claim, the entire case is now eligible for appellate review.

On appeal, CAA will challenge the precedent that has made it nearly impossible for landlords to prevail in takings cases. Importantly, courts have recently shown greater willingness to revisit these issues. In the 2021 case of Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court held that even temporary access mandates can be a physical taking. And more recently, the Federal Circuit in Darby Development Co. v. United States revived landlords’ challenge to the CDC’s nationwide eviction ban, recognizing that forcing housing providers to keep nonpaying tenants may qualify as a physical invasion.

The federal government’s petition for U.S. Supreme Court review in Darby is due Oct. 3, 2025. If the Court takes up that case and reaches the merits, its ruling could be decisive for CAA’s appeal. If not, CAA’s case provides another critical opportunity for courts—and potentially the Supreme Court—to address whether governments must compensate property owners for the burdens of pandemic-era eviction bans.

CAA remains committed to pursuing justice for housing providers in Alameda County and across California and will keep members updated as the appeal moves forward.