When COVID-19 hit in 2020, governments across the United States—federal, state, and local—issued sweeping emergency orders. Many of these orders had significant and sometimes devastating impacts on residential and commercial landlords. These impacts ranged from bans on evictions, rent-withholding, and rent-posting requirements, to complete restrictions on physical access to the property itself.
Now that the legal dust has settled, two major bodies of law provide clear lessons and protective tools for landlords:
- The Takings Clause cases, especially the Eleventh Circuit’s 2025 decision in Alford v. Walton County
- The eviction moratorium cases, including Ala. Ass’n of Realtors v. HHS and Florida decisions such as Hornsleth and Drexel Ave., LLC
Together, these cases send a simple but powerful message: emergency powers do not cancel constitutional protections for landlords. Below is a combined analysis for landlords detailing what these cases mean and how they protect you from governmental overreach in future crises.
I. The Takings Clause: Government Cannot Exclude Owners or Tenants from Private Property
In Alford v. Walton County (11th Cir. 2025), the County enacted an emergency order closing all beaches, including privately owned beaches, and made it a criminal offense for a property owner—or anyone else—to walk on their own land. Officers patrolled private property, parked vehicles on it, and threatened owners with arrest if they stepped onto their own beach.
The Eleventh Circuit held:
1. This was a per se physical taking.
Why? Because the government:
- Physically barred owners from their property.
- Physically occupied the property through police patrols.
- Assumed exclusive possession, something only the owner is legally entitled to do.
The government appropriated the key sticks in the “bundle of property rights”—the rights to possess, control, and exclude. Under Supreme Court precedent (Cedar Point, Loretto, Causby, Horne), this is a categorical taking, automatically requiring just compensation.
2. Emergencies do not eliminate constitutional protections.
The court emphasized: there is no COVID exception to the Takings Clause, and the government must pay for what it takes. This is a critical point for landlords: even during hurricanes, pandemics, riots, or environmental events, the government cannot take over or occupy private rental property without compensating the owner.
3. Temporary restrictions still require compensation
Duration affects the amount owed, not whether a taking occurred. One month of forced exclusion is still a compensable taking.
II. Eviction Moratorium Cases: Limits on Federal and State Power
During the pandemic, many landlords faced eviction moratoria that prevented them from removing non-paying tenants, even while rent debt continued to accumulate. Courts nationwide issued significant rulings on the limits of governmental authority. Key cases are summarized below.
A. The U.S. Supreme Court Ends the CDC Moratorium
In Ala. Ass’n of Realtors v. HHS, 594 U.S. 758 (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court held:
1. The CDC exceeded its statutory authority.
Section 361(a) of the Public Health Service Act gives the CDC power to address specific sources of disease—not authority to regulate landlord-tenant relationships. The Court concluded, the CDC’s nationwide eviction ban was a “breathtaking” assertion of power Congress never granted.
2. Only Congress—not a government agency—can authorize such sweeping restrictions.
This case is a landmark for limiting federal agency overreach into property rights.
B. Florida Courts Reinforce These Limits
1. Hornsleth v. McCloud, 337 So. 3d 518 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)
The Florida Second DCA recognized:
- The CDC moratorium stopped evictions for nonpayment but did not erase rent obligations.
- Landlords retained the right to pursue rent judgments.
- Eviction restrictions must be applied exactly as written and cannot be expanded by courts.
2. 1560-1568 Drexel Ave., LLC v. Dalton, 320 So. 3d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)
The Florida Third DCA held:
- Even during the pandemic, tenants must comply with Florida’s rent-posting statute, § 83.60.
- The CDC moratorium did not excuse tenants from depositing rent into the court registry.
- When the tenant failed to comply, the case was remanded for a default judgment of possession.
3. Other courts noted Takings and Contract Clause challenges are viable.
While not all were successful, courts acknowledged that certain government restrictions may violate:
- The Fifth Amendment
- The Contracts Clause
- Procedural due process rights
These areas remain ripe for further litigation.
III. How Alford and the Moratorium Cases Work Together
Although the cases involve different legal frameworks, they point in the same direction:
1. Government cannot take over your property.
Whether it is:
- physically excluding you,
- occupying the land,
- limiting tenant access, or
- converting a rental property into government-controlled space,
the government must pay compensation under the Takings Clause.
2. Government cannot rewrite landlord-tenant law without statutory authority.
The Supreme Court said the CDC acted without authorization. Florida courts said tenants must still comply with Florida Statutes. The government cannot:
- rewrite lease obligations
- eliminate rent duties
- suspend statutory requirements
- change court procedures
unless the Legislature expressly authorizes it.
3. Emergency powers are real—but limited.
Counties and federal agencies may impose reasonable, temporary safety regulations, but they may not:
- take possession of your rental
- bar you or your tenant from entry
- allow government officials to occupy private property
- suspend statutory landlord rights
- impose sweeping housing controls not authorized by law
without violating the Constitution.
IV. Practical Lessons for Landlords
1. If government physically restricts access, you may have a Takings claim.
Examples:
- County blocks access to a condo after a storm
- Police use your parking lot as a command zone
- County closes docks, pools, or private areas used exclusively by your tenants
- Local government closes a rental building “for safety” indefinitely
- Government requires owners or tenants to vacate without compensation
The Takings Clause applies—even temporarily.
2. If an eviction moratorium returns, watch for legal defects.
A moratorium may be unlawful if:
- It is issued by an agency without statutory authority
- It blocks all eviction types, not just nonpayment
- It conflicts with Florida Statutes (like §§ 83.59, 83.60)
- It deprives landlords of all rent or access without compensation
Landlords should challenge unlawful moratoria early.
3. Document everything during emergency orders.
Keep:
- Emails, notices, and orders from government
- Rental income losses
- Photographs and videos of blocked access
- Statements from tenants
- All law enforcement interactions
Documentation strengthens both Takings and statutory claims.
4. Consult a landlord-law attorney immediately.
Landlords may have claims under:
- The Takings Clause
- The Contracts Clause
- Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments
- Chapter 83, Florida Statutes
- 42 U.S.C. § 1983
- State tort law
These claims must be properly framed from the start.
V. Conclusion: The Constitution Still Protects Landlords During Emergencies
The pandemic exposed the tension between emergency powers and private property rights.
But post-COVID case law now makes one thing clear: government can regulate, but it cannot confiscate, occupy, or rewrite the rules of private property without legal authority and just compensation.
Alford v. Walton County protects landlords against government exclusion and physical takeover.
Ala. Ass’n of Realtors and Florida moratorium cases protect landlords from unauthorized regulatory overreach.
As future emergencies arise—hurricanes, public-health events, environmental crises—these cases arm landlords with the legal framework needed to defend their rights.
If your rental property was restricted by government during an emergency, or if you want preventative legal guidance, Property Management Law Solutions is here to protect your rights and ensure you remain fully compliant while preserving your constitutional protections.