Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/21a8_3fb4.pdf
Page Number: 4.0

4 

CHRYSAFIS v. MARKS 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

quires only the dissemination of “purely factual and uncon-
troversial information” in the context of commercial speech 
and is therefore authorized by our precedents.  Zauderer v. 
Office  of  Disciplinary  Counsel  of  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio, 
471  U. S.  626,  651  (1985).    Given  the  arguments  on  the 
other side, I again cannot say that the legal rights in issue 
are indisputably clear. 
  Second,  applicants  have  not  shown  that  critical  or  ex-
igent  circumstances  justify  our  intervention.    As  I  have 
said,  CEEFPA’s  pause on  eviction  proceedings  will  expire 
in less than three weeks, alleviating the hardship to New 
York landlords.  Any hardship is further alleviated by pro-
visions of CEEFPA that provide relief from foreclosure for 
property owners who own 10 or fewer dwelling units.  See 
2020 N. Y. Laws ch. 381, pt. B, subpts. A–B.  Further, land-
lords’ hardship is alleviated because CEEFPA does not pre-
clude them from seeking unpaid rent and other damages in 
a common-law action.  Finally, respondent states that New 
York  is  currently  distributing  more  than  $2  billion  in  aid 
that can be used in part to pay back rent, thereby helping 
to alleviate the need for evictions.  See 2021 N. Y. Laws ch. 
53, p. 635. 
  While applicants correctly point out that there are land-
lords  who  suffer  hardship,  we  must  balance  against  the 
landlords’ hardship the hardship to New York tenants who 
have relied on CEEFPA’s protections and will now be forced 
to face eviction proceedings earlier than expected.  This is 
troubling because, as noted, New York is in the process of 
distributing  over  $2  billion  in  federal  assistance  that  will 
help tenants affected by the pandemic avoid eviction.  See 
ibid.;  Consolidated  Appropriations  Act,  2021,  H.  R.  133, 
116th Cong., 2d Sess., 686–692 (2020).  Ending CEEFPA’s 
protections early may lead to unnecessary evictions.  It is 
impossible—especially  on  the  abbreviated  schedule  of  an 
application for an emergency injunction—to know whether 
more hardship will result from leaving CEEFPA in place or