logo
In win for landlords, appeals court strikes down eviction expungement law

In win for landlords, appeals court strikes down eviction expungement law

Yahoo23-04-2025

Photo via Getty Images.
Life just got harder for Minnesotans who want to shed the stigma — and the practical complications — of a past eviction.
In a unanimous decision released Monday, a three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals struck down a portion of a 2023 law designed to streamline the expungement process for evicted renters.
Under the provision in question, judges were mandated to expunge court records of eviction proceedings in cases in which the tenant has satisfied the terms of a settlement agreement.
In an opinion penned by Judge Peter Reyes, Jr., the appeals court criticized that requirement, saying that it 'removes the district court's discretion to determine whether expungement of its own records is appropriate and infringes on the judiciary's inherent power to manage its own records.'
The ruling seems intended to protect the judiciary's prerogatives against the encroachment of the Legislature.
'[The law] is contrary to standard court procedure, which allows the adverse party to object and the district court to decide the issue on the merits,' Reyes continued. 'In essence, [it] precludes courts from considering the underlying facts of any case, considering the arguments raised by a party opposing expungement, making findings, or determining whether granting the expungement is in the best interests of society or the individual.'
The successful challenge was brought by St. Louis Park-based landlord Sela Investments, LTD, after a former tenant, identified only as 'L.H.', petitioned the Hennepin County District Court for expungement.
The details of that proceeding are scant because L.H.'s records have been expunged.
According to the briefs submitted to the appeals court, Sela commenced an eviction action against L.H. in December of 2023 over an unspecified violation of a lease. The following month, Sela and J.H. reached an agreement, and J.H. moved out by Jan. 31.
In June 2024, J.H. filed for expungement on the grounds that the agreement had been satisfied. Less than an hour later, a district court referee granted the motion and, within a few days, J.H.'s expungement was finalized by an order from the district court judge.
In a friend of the court brief, a coalition of 10 nonprofits that advocate for renters argued that the mandatory expungement provisions in the 2023 law provided vital protections from the harms that arise from having an eviction proceeding on one's record. Overturning the law could create 'grave consequences for tenants across Minnesota.'
Among other things, the advocates noted that evictions 'disproportionately impact communities of color, women, victims of sexual and domestic violence, individuals with disabilities, and individuals receiving public housing assistance.'
The groups' brief pointed to studies that showed an array of adverse health impacts arising in the wake of evictions, including worse birth outcomes for mothers and newborns, as well as significant increase in suicides.
In response, Christopher Kalla and Douglas Turner, Sela's attorneys, wrote that the 'parade of horribles' outlined by the renter advocates are 'not unique to this appeal and the unconstitutionality' of the law. Kalla and Turner also argued that recent reforms to Minnesota's renter-screening laws 'provide relief to most, if not all, of the examples identified by the Intervenor.'
In its ruling, the appeals court sent J.H. 's expungement request back to Hennepin County District Court for consideration under a separate provision of the eviction expungement law. Under that standard, the court can order expungement in the interest of justice when 'those interests are not outweighed by the public's interest in knowing about the record.'
J.H.'s attorney, Elizabeth Frazier of the Minnesota Assistance Council for Veterans, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

California to Sue Trump for ‘Illegal' National Guard Mobilization
California to Sue Trump for ‘Illegal' National Guard Mobilization

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

California to Sue Trump for ‘Illegal' National Guard Mobilization

California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard in Ceres on April 16, 2025. Credit - Justin Sullivan—Getty Images Governor Gavin Newsom of California announced that his state plans to file a lawsuit early Monday against Donald Trump for mobilizing the National Guard over the weekend to quell immigration-related protests in Los Angeles. As news broadcasts and social media have proliferated with scenes of violence and mayhem on the streets of southern California, Newsom alleged in an interview with MSNBC on Sunday evening that it is the U.S. President who 'created the conditions you see on your TV tonight.' Newsom condemned the violence, calling it 'unacceptable' and 'wrong.' He added that there were 'a lot of great people out there, doing the right thing,' but that 'insurgent groups' and 'anarchists' were infiltrating the demonstrations 'to create real problems.' 'They're just playing right into Donald Trump's hand. And they need to be called out and they need to be arrested,' Newsom said of the bad actors. 'They're doing more than damage to buildings and to property. They're potentially damaging the very foundation of our republic. Democracy is in the balance.' When asked if he supports the peaceful protesters, Newsom responded emphatically: 'Of course I support them. Protest is the foundation of this democracy. It's what makes this country great. And that needs to persist. And right now people need to come out. But we need to be mindful of the toxicity of this moment, and then we have to deal with these elements that are coming in that are intentionally trying to take advantage of this in a way that only aids and abets Donald Trump.' Newsom added that his priority is to keep peaceful protesters as well as 'those that are enforcing the laws in a respectful and responsible way' safe. Newsom, whose second and final term as Governor ends in 2027 and who is speculated to be a 2028 Democratic presidential contender, repeatedly focused his blame for the escalation of the situation in California on Trump: 'He's exacerbated the conditions. He's lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire,' Newsom said, calling the mobilization of the National Guard 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' 'Donald Trump needs to pull back. He needs to stand down. Donald Trump is inflaming these conditions. This is Donald Trump's problem right now, and if he can't solve it, we will.' Here's what to know. Mass protests and demonstrations have taken place across Los Angeles county since Friday in response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented residents and laborers. While local officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and the city council, sided with peaceful protesters in opposition to the immigration enforcement actions, demonstrations grew increasingly violent, as clashes intensified between some demonstrators and law enforcement officials. Rocks and molotov cocktails have been thrown; police vehicles and self-driving Waymo cars have been vandalized; and authorities have used tear gas, 'flash bang' grenades, and rubber bullets to attempt crowd control, according to reports. 'Everyone has the right to peacefully protest, but let me be clear: violence and destruction are unacceptable, and those responsible will be held accountable,' Bass said in a post on X on Saturday. In a White House memorandum on Saturday, Trump said the anti-ICE protests 'constitute a form of rebellion' against the U.S. and ordered Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deploy 2,000 National Guard personnel in response. In a post on X, Hegseth said the National Guard would be mobilized 'IMMEDIATELY.' Hegseth added that 'if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized—they are on high alert.' To mobilize the National Guard, Trump invoked Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, which allows for the federalization of the National Guard in cases of an invasion or a rebellion, or if the President is unable to execute the country's laws with 'regular forces.' Section 12406, however, also states that 'Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' Newsom confirmed that he did not request the deployment of the National Guard, making it the first time since 1965 that the National Guard has been activated to a state without a governor's request. In an open letter to Hegseth, Newsom's office called the mobilization 'a serious breach of state sovereignty' and requested that the Pentagon chief 'immediately rescind' the order and 'return the National Guard to its rightful control by the State of California, to be deployed as appropriate when necessary.' The Democratic Governors Association backed Newsom in a statement, saying: 'It's important we respect the executive authority of our country's governors to manage their National Guards.' Moreover, an 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, limits federal military personnel from being used for civilian law enforcement within the U.S., which means in Los Angeles the National Guard forces mobilized by Trump can protect federal agents, such as ICE officials, and federal properties, such as detention centers, but they cannot arrest protesters. The Posse Comitatus Act 'prohibits troops from being used domestically unless the Insurrection Act is invoked,' constitutional scholar and dean of UC Berkeley Law School Erwin Chemerinsky tells TIME, 'and the President has not done that.' According to Reuters, Trump still could invoke the Insurrection Act, but doing so would enter 'riskier legal territory.' The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was when President George H.W. Bush mobilized the National Guard to quell riots in Los Angeles following the acquittal of the police officers involved in the beating of Rodney King. But a key difference between 1992 and now is that then-Governor of California Pete Wilson had requested federal assistance. Calling in troops to suppress protests has also raised First Amendment concerns. The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement on Saturday that it also plans to file a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, calling the mobilization of the National Guard an 'abuse of power.' Earlier on Sunday, Trump's 'border czar' Tom Homan, who has previously threatened arrest for anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement, told MSNBC that he would not rule that out even for officials like Newsom and Bass. 'I'll say it about anybody,' Homan said. 'It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' 'Governor Newsom is an embarrassment to the state,' Homan added. 'Criminal aliens are walking the streets of this state every day because of him and his policies.' In his interview hours later with MSNBC, Newsom responded, saying: 'That kind of bloviating is exhausting.' Newsom challenged Homan to arrest him but to 'lay your hands off' law-abiding, tax-paying undocumented residents. 'He's a tough guy. Why doesn't he do that? He knows where to find me,' he said. 'Come after me. Arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy. I don't give a damn. But I care about my community. I care about this community.' Newsom criticized the Trump Administration for targeting non-criminal undocumented residents for immigration enforcement and pushed back on the accusation that California does not cooperate with the federal government. 'I have no problem with going after criminals. We coordinate and collaborate with ICE,' Newsom said, pointing to the state handing over more than 10,000 inmates to ICE since he took office in 2019. 'When these guys say we don't go after criminals, again, they're lying, and they're knowingly lying.' When asked if Trump could be putting the spotlight on Los Angeles to take attention away from his recent fallout with Elon Musk, Newsom said 'of course,' also citing Trump's struggles to pass the massive tax and spending package known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in Congress as well as ongoing challenges related to Trump's global trade war. 'He's the master of distraction. He's the commander of chaos. That's what Donald Trump does,' said Newsom. Newsom claimed that Trump used 'the guise of immigration' to create a 'manufactured crisis' in order to challenge the Posse Comitatus Act. 'This is about authoritarian tendencies. This is about command and control. This is about power. This is about ego,' said Newsom. 'This is a consistent pattern of practice of recklessness. This guy has abandoned the great principles of this great democracy. He's threatening to go after judges he disagrees with, cut off funding to institutions of higher learning, he's on a cultural binge, he's rewriting history, censoring historical facts. This is something completely different, and this is part of that ongoing play that is unfolding in front of our eyes.' Contact us at letters@

Here are the Steuben County primary candidates on the ballot in June
Here are the Steuben County primary candidates on the ballot in June

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Here are the Steuben County primary candidates on the ballot in June

Registered Republicans in 15 Steuben County towns will decide the winners of GOP primary races on Tuesday, June 24. This year, only Republican primary elections will take place in Steuben County, and only registered Republican voters in designated towns are eligible to vote. Depending on the municipality, primary voters will choose candidates for a variety of town offices, including supervisor, highway superintendent, clerk and town council. In addition, Republicans voters in seven towns will have a primary for the Steuben County Legislature on their ballots. Polls are open 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. on primary day. Primary winners earn the Republican ballot line for the November general election. Steuben County has approximately 31,000 registered Republicans, according to the New York State Board of Elections. Here are the Steuben County towns with at least one Republican primary on the ballot June 24. Candidates (vote for any two): Brian Knowles, Mike Hann, Hal W. Bailey Candidates: Frederick Thompson, Michael J. Volino Candidates: Michael Austin, Norman Maynard Candidates (vote for any two): Les Smith, Terry E. Wheat, Kyle Peterson Candidates: Frederick Thompson, Michael J. Volino Candidates: Justin Eberlin, Jenniffer L. Mullen Candidates: Justin Eberlin, Jenniffer L. Mullen Candidates: Judith Hall, Brian S. Giuliano Candidates: Cassandra Sick, Loraine M. Sanderson Candidates (vote for any two): Karen M. Johnson, William E. Schumacher, Jonathan Weldy Candidates: Drinald V. Bilcari, Kristen Klemenz-Westervelt, James W. Kuhl Candidates: Justin Eberlin, Jenniffer L. Mullen Candidates: Lydia Aguilera, Al Wordingham Candidates: William J. Reagan, Russell W. Morseman III Candidates: Richard W. Risley, Nathan McChesney, Dan Barney Candidates: Michael J. Volino, Jeffery P. Sweeney Candidates: Frederick Thompson, Michael J. Volino Candidates: Abram N. Weeks, Tonya R. Tompkins Candidates (vote for any two): Paula J. Brewer, Kenneth A. LeCrone Jr., Christopher Jordan Candidates (vote for any two): Shirley Ann Dusty Bills, Robert Peoples, Laura L. Knowles Candidates: Alan Trenchard, Richard J. Decker More: Why Alstom dedicated Plant 4 to Jim Griffin, 'a champion of local development' Early voting for primary elections will take place June 14-22. Only one location for early voting will be available in Steuben County − the Steuben County Annex, 20 E. Morris St., Bath. Early voting hours are 9 a.m.-5 p.m. daily with extended hours until 8 p.m. on Tuesday, Thursday. Email Neal Simon at nsimon@ To get unlimited access to the latest news, please subscribe or activate your digital account today. This article originally appeared on The Leader: Steuben County NY primary election: Who's on the ballot in 2025

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

time3 hours ago

Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses

BATON ROUGE, La. -- As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally" injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store