MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037696103

Expanding the Right to Counsel in Eviction Cases: Arguments for and Limitations of "Civil Gideon" Laws in a Post-COVID 19 World

2023· article· en· W7037696103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainability and Innovation in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvictionRentingPaceFair Housing ActQuarter (Canadian coin)LandlordCensusPayment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Excerpt) With the cost of housing rising nationwide and incomes largely failing to keep pace with this increase, the United States is in the midst of interrelated affordable housing and eviction crises. The housing affordability metric that has long been the bedrock of American housing policy is that households should spend no more than thirty percent of their income on housing. This is no longer an attainable goal for many Americans. By 2017, forty-eight percent of renter households were “rent burdened”—they paid more than thirty percent of their income in rent. Over a quarter of American renters, or 11 million households, are “severely rent burdened,” meaning they spend more than half their monthly income on rent. When a renter is rent-burdened, they have less income remaining for non-housing essentials like food, medicine, transportation, and childcare. The chances of eviction also climb significantly. Eviction statistics paint a sobering picture. In 2016—the last year the Princeton University-based Eviction Lab collected and aggregated eviction data at the national level—approximately 2.3 percent of renter households in the United States lost their housing due to eviction. This figure is roughly double what it was in 2000. There is also strong gender and racial disparity in these statistics. Black renters face eviction nearly twice as frequently as white renters. Low-income Black women face the highest eviction rates of all, with one in five Black female renters reporting they have experienced eviction at least once in their lifetimes. The devastating mental, physical, and financial consequences evictions have on individuals, children, families, and communities have been well documented. Eviction means more than just losing a place to live. Mothers who experience eviction suffer higher rates of material hardship, depression, and poorer health than their peers. Children facing eviction are more likely to be disciplined in school and involved in child protective services. Eviction can lead to a vicious cycle of housing insecurity and homelessness. People who are evicted struggle to secure new housing, because evictions stay on a renter’s record for years— even if the case was dismissed—and many landlords screen applications for prior evictions through a process called “blacklisting.” Tenants evicted from public housing may, under federal law, be denied future federal housing assistance for up to five years. Evictions further contribute to the ongoing cycle of poverty by damaging renters’ credit scores and by increasing the chances they will lose their jobs. And because eviction and housing displacement can increase transiency and force renters into homelessness and crowded living environments, eviction and housing insecurity can increase exposure to and the continued spread of COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic made these problems worse. By late December 2020, ten million Americans were behind on their rent obligations due to COVID-related wage and job loss, a figure three times higher than the normal rate. Because of this, the pandemic initially brought the eviction crisis into the national conversation in a way that has little historical precedent. During the pandemic’s first year, the federal government implemented several new assistance programs to help vulnerable tenants; these included the CARES Act, the Emergency Rental Assistance (“ERA”) program contained within the American Rescue Plan, and the Center for Disease Control’s eviction moratorium. Each program temporarily bolstered the safety net for low-income renters but fell short of solving the underlying causes of housing insecurity that existed long before the pandemic. Now, with CARES Act funding depleted and the Supreme Court invalidating the eviction moratorium on August 26, 2021, there remains little federal protection against eviction—but the crisis facing renters is not over. Two years after the pandemic began, eight million Americans remained behind on their rent and at risk of losing their housing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.028
Scholarly communication0.0150.021
Open science0.0080.015
Research integrity0.0420.039
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicSustainability and Innovation in BusinessFrench-language works237,207