This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), according to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), the Oakland Housing Authority revised its lease to include provisions aimed at maintaining a drug‑free environment, updating paragraph 9(m), the occupants’ responsibility statement, and the tenant agreement.
According to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), according to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), the Authority reported about 700 felony arrests for drug‑related activity from 1998 through November of the current year, among its roughly 8,000 residents in 3,308 housing units.
According to Respondents (Mr. Renne), according to Respondents (Mr. Renne), tenants have a right in eviction court to present equitable and legal defenses.
Background and question before the Court
Oral argument began at 11:13 a.m. before the Supreme Court.
Justice asked whether the issue is jurisdiction.
Chief Justice asked whether there is any procedure to ensure the housing authority’s broad discretion is not abused.
Justice Kennedy asked about the respondents’ standing to contest the housing authority’s interpretation of a HUD regulation.
What each side argues
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
Oakland Housing Authority
According to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), according to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), the Oakland Housing Authority revised its lease to include provisions aimed at maintaining a drug‑free environment, updating paragraph 9(m), the occupants’ responsibility statement, and the tenant agreement.
According to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), according to Gary T. Lafayette (Private Petitioners), the Authority reported about 700 felony arrests for drug‑related activity from 1998 through November of the current year, among its roughly 8,000 residents in 3,308 housing units.
Respondents (Mr. Renne)
According to Respondents (Mr. Renne), according to Respondents (Mr. Renne), tenants have a right in eviction court to present equitable and legal defenses.
What happened at oral argument
Oral argument began at 11:13 a.m. before the Supreme Court.
Justice asked whether the issue is jurisdiction.
Chief Justice asked whether there is any procedure to ensure the housing authority’s broad discretion is not abused.
Justice Kennedy asked about the respondents’ standing to contest the housing authority’s interpretation of a HUD regulation.
The court noted that Mr. Feldman had three minutes remaining.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 30e915629865f17401af-r1-0a8c5a2935f349af.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 19, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.