A series of case studies examining how state preemption of local housing policies has affected crisis response and recovery efforts during COVID-19 found that:

• Local governments failed to consider adopting local policies that would conflict with existing state preemption laws even if such policies could help stabilize housing for at-risk renters.

• Local policies that were not directly preempted were nonetheless “chilled” and not pursued due to concerns that acting would spark legal challenges or new preemption efforts at the state level.

Read more from Greene S, Ramakrishnan K, Morales-Burnett J. State Preemption of Local Housing Protections: Lessons from a Pandemic. Urban Institute. September 2020. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/state-preemption-local-housing-protections.

A paper examined the critical role grassroots organizations play in fostering equitable political processes and supporting housing policies that may reduce health inequities. The study found that state preemption often forces such organizations to narrow their policy goals and adapt their political strategies, which then stretches their capacity and limits their ability to be successful. The study concluded that state preemption may therefore cement inequitable housing policies by weakening the political capacity of grassroots organizations that are critical to building power in racially and economically marginalized communities. Read more from  Jamila Michener, Entrenching Inequity, Eroding Democracy: State Preemption of Local Housing Policy, 35 Stan. L. & Pol'y Rev. (2023).

A study showed that the more politically conservative a state legislature is, the more likely it is that the state will preempt local affordable housing policies. The same study found that it is less likely for states with more professional legislatures and those with a higher proportion of renters to preempt affordable housing policies. Accordingly, it may be helpful to consider these factors when organizing campaigns to address preemption of affordable housing policies. Read more from Christopher B. Goodman & Megan E. Hatch, State Preemption and Affordable Housing Policy, 49 Publius: J. Fed. (2023).

Austin, Texas, sought to address racial and socioeconomic discrimination in rental housing by prohibiting landlords from rejecting otherwise qualified tenants based solely on their source of income (e.g., federal housing assistance). Across the country, only one in three voucher households is protected by nondiscrimination laws like those Austin adopted. The Texas state legislature responded by invalidating Austin’s ordinance and preempting localities from adopting similar antidiscrimination laws, despite the absence of any statewide protections for recipients of housing assistance and despite clear evidence that source-of-income discrimination disproportionately harms people of color. Read more from Tighe JR, Hatch ME, Mead J. Source of income discrimination and fair housing policy. J Plan Lit. 2016;32(1):3-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412216670603.

A study suggests a relationship between state preemption of local mandatory inclusionary zoning (IZ) policies and both increased rates of self-reported poor or fair health status and a greater likelihood that Black adults report delaying medical care because of cost. Read more from Melton-Fant, C. Relationship Between State Preemption of Inclusionary Zoning Policies and Health Outcomes: Is There Disparate Impact Among People of Color?. Housing Policy Debate. 2020. doi: 10.1080/10511482.2020.1798488.