It is telling that Congress, which has been happy to spend trillions of dollars fighting COVID-19, has nevertheless declined to change the law — perhaps because, the legalities aside, it has realized that the moratorium is making a mess of its others. One of the core aims of the various relief bills that have been signed since last year has been to prevent unemployed Americans from getting behind on their bills — including rent — during periods in which they were unable to work. And yet, by adding an eviction moratorium on top of its spending — and, thereby, by deferring rent arrears into the future — the federal government has managed simultaneously to limit the immediate demand for its $46.6 billion rent-assistance program, to discourage renters from finding work, and to ensure that the brunt of both problems will be felt by the millions of small-time landlords who do not have access to the Treasury’s largesse.

Over the course of the COVID-19 crisis, the federal government has provided an extraordinary amount of financial support to struggling families. Analysis from Garrett Watson at the Tax Foundation found that a single-earner family of four that made $60,000 per year prior to the pandemic received almost $70,000 in COVID-relief benefits from April of last year to September of this year. Thus far, the mitigation bill sits at a remarkable $5 trillion — more money than the federal government spent in total in all of 2019. Given our rising federal debt, and the higher-than-usual risk of inflation, it would be unwise for Washington, D.C., to add to this number. But, if it must, it should do so in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution and that will not undermine Congress’s broader aims. A moratorium on evictions doesn’t match either of those descriptions. It must not be allowed to stand.