Document: 535 U.S. 125 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENTv.RUCKER ET AL. No. 00-1770. Supreme Court of the United States. Argued February 19, 2002. Decided March 26, 2002.* CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS FOR NINTH CIRCUIT Title 42 U. S. C. § 1437d(l)(6) provides that each "public housing agency shall utilize leases ... provid[ing] any drug-related criminal activity on or off [federally assisted low-income housing] premises, engaged in by a public tenant, member tenant's household, guest other person under control, be cause for termination tenancy." Respondents are four such tenants Oakland Housing Authority (OHA). Paragraph 9(m) their obligates them to "assure guest, another not engage near premises." Pursuant States Department and Urban Development (HUD) regulations authorizing local authorities evict even if tenant did know, could foresee, control behavior occupants, OHA instituted state-court eviction proceedings against respondents, alleging violations lease paragraph household guest. filed federal actions HUD, OHA, OHA's director, arguing does require terms so-called "innocent" tenants, and, alternative, it does, statute is unconstitutional. The District Court's issuance preliminary injunction was affirmed en banc Ninth Circuit, which held HUD's interpretation permitting inconsistent with congressional intent must rejected Chevron A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 837, 842-843. Held: Section 1437d(l)(6)'s plain language unambiguously requires give discretion terminate when engages activity, regardless whether knew, should have known, activity. Congress' decision impose qualification statute, combined its use term "any" modify "drug-related activity," precludes knowledge requirement. See Monsanto, 491 600, 609. Because has an expansive meaning — i. e., "one some indiscriminately whatever kind," Gonzales, 520 1, 5 specified persons grounds termination, just about. Circuit's ruling "under control" modifies "other person," but also "member household" "guest," runs counter basic grammar rules would result nonsensical reading. Rather, HUD offers convincing explanation grammatical imperative only person": By "control," means sense permitted access premises. Implicit "household member" "guest" premises been granted tenant. unambiguous text reinforced comparing 21 881(a)(7), subjects all leasehold interests civil forfeiture used commit activities, expressly exempts who had no thereby demonstrating Congress knows exactly how provide "innocent owner" defense. It one 1437d(l)(6). Given directly spoken precise question at issue, Chevron, supra, 842, considerations Circuit attempted bolster holding unavailing, including legislative history, erroneous conclusion reading leads absurd results, canon constitutional avoidance, reliance inapposite decisions this cast doubt constitutionality Due Process Clause. Pp. 130-136. 237 F. 3d 1113, reversed remanded. REHNQUIST, J., delivered opinion Court, Members joined, except BREYER, took part consideration cases. James Feldman argued petitioner. With him briefs were Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney McCallum, Deputy Kneedler, Barbara Biddle, Howard Scher, Richard Hauser, Carole W. Wilson, M. Schmeltzer, Harold J. Rennett. Gary T. Lafayette private petitioners 00-1781. Susan Kumagai. Paul Renne respondents both brief Donato, Whitty Somvichian, John Murcko.â CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST Court. 1 drug dealers "increasingly imposing reign terror federally tenants," passed Anti-Drug Abuse Act 1988. 5122, 102 Stat. 4301, 11901(3) (1994 ed.). Act, as later amended, threatens health, safety, right peaceful enjoyment ed., Supp. V). Petitioners say allow authority reason not. We agree petitioners. 2 respondents' leases, tracking 1437d(l)(6), [a]ny premise[s]." App. 59. signed agreement stating "understand[s] I my guests violate provision, tenancy may terminated evicted." Id., 69. 3 In late 1997 early 1998, state court provision. complaint alleged: (1) respective grandsons William Lee Hill, whom listed residents caught apartment complex parking lot smoking marijuana; (2) daughter respondent Pearlie Rucker, resides her resident, found cocaine crack pipe three blocks from Rucker's apartment;1 (3) instances within 2-month period, Herman Walker's caregiver two others apartment. issued Walker notices violation first occasions, before initiating action after third violation. 4 administering evictions these circumstances. closely track statutory language,2 "[i]n deciding [public authority] consider circumstances case ...." 24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(i) (2001). made clear authorities' includes those situations "[the] occupants unit." 56 Fed. Reg. 51560, 51567 (1991). After initiated court, commenced director They challenged Administrative Procedure 706(2)(A), then unconstitutional.3 injunction, enjoining "terminating pursuant `Tenant Lease' drugrelated occur unit know of, activity." Pet. Cert. 00-1770, pp. 165a-166a. 6 A panel Appeals reversed, permits personally aware constitutional. Rucker Davis, 203 627 (CA9 2000). An grant injunction. 1113 That "is Congressional rejected" step 842-843 (1984). 3d, 1126. 7 certiorari, 533 976 (2001), 534 813 now reverse, vest members about 8 so seems evident statute. "[e]ach thought address "the level personal fault required eviction." 1120. Yet 609 (1989). As we explained, word `any' meaning, is, `one kind.'" (1997). Thus, 9 possible "guest." ultimately adopted reading, concluding prohibits where "for lack reason, realistically exercise over conduct guest." But grammar. disjunctive "or" applies person." Indeed, view everything coming sentence "a control." "by `control,' 66 28781 without regard 10 Comparing related provision reinforces text. makes subject activities activity: "[N]o property forfeited act omission established owner committed omitted consent owner." 881(a)(7) amended same 1988 created "meant read consistently" requirement into 1121-1122. sections deal distinctly different matters. defense cases already existence prior 881(a)(7). All add might And brought interest, pre-existing 1437(d)(l)(6), here, quite measure. entirely reasonable think Government, seeking transfer itself proceeding, defense," while acting landlord project. shows knew 11 next resorted history. correctly recognized reference history inappropriate unambiguous. 1123. Appeals' finding textual ambiguity wrong, see 130-132, there need consult history.4 12 Nor correct results.5 violated Instead, entrusts authorities, best position take account among things, degree project suffers "rampant violent crime," 11901(2) ed. V), seriousness offending action," Reg., 28803, extent leaseholder taken steps prevent mitigate ibid. "absurd" sometimes Such "nofault" common "incident responsibility normal landlord-tenant law practice." 51567. Strict liability maximizes deterrence eases enforcement difficulties. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. Haslip, 499 14 13 And, course, obvious why no-fault evictions: Regardless knowledge, "cannot crime, threaten health safety residents, threat project." drugs leading "murders, muggings, forms violence "deterioration physical environment substantial government expenditures," 11901(4) permit order "provide decent, safe, free illegal drugs," 11901(1) effort avoid invoked avoidance. "has application absence ambiguity." Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 483, 494 "Any conclusion, purporting judicial restraint, trench upon powers vested Art. I, Constitution." Albertini, 472 675, 680 (1985). There are, moreover, "serious doubts" affording crime. Reno Flores, 507 292, 314, n. (1993) (emphasis deleted). 15 "raise[s] serious questions Clause Fourteenth Amendment," because "tenants deprived interest relationship individual wrongdoing." 1124-1125 (citing Scales States, 367 203, 224-225 (1961); Southwestern Telegraph & Telephone Danaher, 238 482 (1915)). acts sovereign. Scales, criminally charged defendant knowing membership organization advocated overthrow Government. Arkansas forbade discrimination customers telephone company. situation present different. attempting punish civilly regulate general populace. instead owns, invoking clause agreed required. Danaher actions. 16 sought discussion pointing fact citing Greene Lindsey, 456 444 (1982). This undoubtedly true, deprive proper notice Amendment. But, cases, deprivation will unlawful detainer respondents. indication given past, future. Any factual disputes actually can, resolved proceedings.6 17 hold "Congress issue." S., 842. 18 Accordingly, judgment remanded further consistent opinion. 19 ordered. 20 BREYER Notes: * Together 00-1781,Oakland et al. al., certiorari court. â Briefs amici curiae urging reversal Council Large Public Authorities Maher Robert Graham; International City-County Management Association Ruda I. Crowley; Washington Legal Foundation Daniel Popeo Samp. affirmance AARP Catherine Bishop Julie E. Levin; American Civil Liberties Union Mark Lopez, Steven R. Shapiro, Alan L. Schlosser; National Network End Domestic Violence Bruce D. Sokler Fernando Laguarda; Pennsylvania Resident Councils Eileen Yacknin Matesic; Lawrence Lessig David Goldberg N. Abrahamson. Kirsten Levingston, Michael Feldberg, Martha Davis Coalition Protect curiae. dismissed incarcerated, thus longer posed (PHAs) obligation tenants: "To assure in: "(A) PHA's employees PHA, "(B) preceding tenancy, 966.4(f)(12)(i) raised Americans Disabilities claims state-law Even appropriate look help relied passages 1990 Senate Report proposed amendment 1123 Rep. 101-316 (1990)). commenting version amendment, never enacted. version, imposed standard crimes than unqualified 136 Cong. Rec. 15991, 16012 (1990) (reproducing 566, 101st Cong., 2d Sess., §§ 521(f) 714(a) (1990)), Conference. H. Conf. 101-943, p. 418 (1990). dissent below plausibly mere suggestion "wide connected behavior" affords them. 1134 (Sneed, dissenting). cite House Asset Forfeiture Reform 2000, codified 983. Brief 15-16. For reasons discussed 132 page, concerning provisions probative 1996 enacted five years supports our holding. expanded reach changing applying taking place "on near" occurring off" Opportunity Program Extension 1996, 9(a)(2), 110 836. Congress, "presumed aware" rejecting requirement, change Lorillard Pons, 434 575, 580 (1978). above, eviction, specifically authorized 1437d(l)(2), "unreasonable conditions [in leases]." addition, latter section cannot trump more specific Green Bock Laundry Machine Co., 490 504, 524-526 cited due process concern. raise others: First Amendment Excessive Fines Judge O'Scannlain, writing concernsLyng Automobile Workers, 485 360 (1988), forecloses claim unknowing violates guarantee freedom association. 627, 647 (2000). neither cash nor in-kind payment payable government" therefore "not analysis excessive fine." 648.

Category: 1