Tag: White Paper

RER White Paper Raises Constitutional Concerns With Senate Housing Bill’s Section 901

Posted on by abigail_grenadier

The Real Estate Roundtable (RER) this week released a white paper authored by Paul Clement of Clement & Murphy, PLLC, adding significant constitutional concerns to the growing case against Section 901 of Title IX of the Senate-passed 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (H.R. 6644). While the broader legislation contains several constructive provisions to help boost housing supply, the Senate bill’s restrictions on certain institutional investors would undermine new development, disrupt the build-to-rent (BTR) market, and raise serious legal questions. (White Paper, April 14)

Why It Matters

  • The Senate provision would apply to corporate entities that own more than 350 single-family homes. It would largely prohibit those entities from purchasing additional single-family homes and require them to sell newly constructed single-family rentals (SFR) after seven years.
  • The investor “purchase ban” on single-family homes and the “forced sale” of new single-family rentals would amount to an unprecedented federal intervention in housing markets at a time when the country needs policies that encourage development—not deter it.

What the White Paper Says

  • The white paper released by RER argues that the forced-sale requirement for build-to-rent housing raises serious constitutional problems under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause. (White Paper, April 14)
  • The paper concludes government cannot force one private owner to sell its homes to another without trampling on the Constitution’s “public-use” and “just-compensation” requirements. Furthermore, the Senate’s bill provides no mechanism for the government to pay just compensation to investors whose homes would be taken.
  • The paper also raises equal protection concerns by singling out a narrow category of corporate owners for special burdens.
  • While Congress has broad authority to regulate economic activity, the paper notes that it cannot arbitrarily target a specific class of property owners—particularly where the ownership and disposition of private property are at stake.
  • In addition, the paper argues that the proposal departs from the traditional state and local roles in land use and housing policy, raising broader federalism concerns.

Roundtable Advocacy

  • RER has consistently supported policies that expand housing availability, reduce barriers to development, and improve affordability.
  • At the same time, RER has warned that Section 901 would do the opposite by discouraging new investment in housing and weakening a growing source of supply.
  • RER shared the white paper with members of Congress in a letter urging lawmakers to preserve the bill’s pro-supply provisions while removing Title IX.
  • Since the Senate passed its version of the bill, progressive and conservative groups alike have cited numerous benefits that SFR owners and builders deliver for U.S. housing markets, in terms of increasing supply, maintenance, and upkeep of units, and providing opportunities for families to live in communities with strong education systems, where they can’t afford to buy. (Progressive Policy Institute, February 2026; Competitive Enterprise Institute, February 2026)

  •  As lawmakers work to address the housing shortage, the focus should remain on expanding supply and lowering barriers to development—not on punitive restrictions that threaten new investment, weaken build-to-rent housing, and make affordability challenges worse.

The constitutional concerns surrounding Section 901, and the broader policy debate over how best to expand housing supply, will be part of the discussion at RER’s Spring Roundtable Meeting (Roundtable-level members only) next week in Washington.