Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)
Federal Disaster Housing Stability Act of 2025
A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Federal Disaster Housing Stability Act of 2025 creates a pause on evictions and foreclosures during major disasters or emergencies. For 120 days following a presidential disaster declaration, landlords cannot evict tenants for nonpayment of rent, charge late fees, or increase rent. Additionally, it prevents mortgage servicers from starting or executing foreclosure processes on covered properties for a 6-month period. The act applies to disaster areas declared by the President, state Governors, the Mayor of D.C., or Tribal chiefs.
Yes· 3 of 30
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Directly protects low-income tenants and homeowners from losing their housing during disasters.
- Scored +9
Is this likely to reduce homelessness?
Explicitly prohibits evictions and foreclosures to prevent homelessness during disaster periods.
- Scored +7
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
Explicitly includes Tribal chiefs in the disaster declaration authority.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Landlords who rely on rental income as a primary business may suffer financial losses.
- Scored -4
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Small landlords and property management businesses may face loss of income due to the eviction and fee moratorium.
- Scored -4
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Overrides state-level eviction and foreclosure laws within disaster areas.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Prevention of Homelessness during Disasters: Section 2(a) prevents landlords from removing tenants or filing court actions to recover possession of a dwelling for nonpayment of rent, which keeps people in their homes during crises.
-
Financial Protections for Tenants: Section 2(a)(2) and (3) stop landlords from charging fees or penalties for nonpayment of rent and prevent them from increasing rental amounts during the moratorium.
-
Right to Return: Section 2(a)(4) ensures that tenants who had to temporarily relocate cannot be prevented from returning to their home or be forced to undergo new eligibility screening.
-
Housing Stability for Homeowners: Section 3 stops mortgage servicers from initiating foreclosure processes or executing foreclosure sales for a 6-month period, protecting homeowners from losing their property during a disaster.
-
Additional Time to Vacate: Section 2(b) requires landlords to provide a 30-day notice before a tenant must vacate, and prohibits these notices from being issued until the eviction moratorium ends.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restrictions on Property Owners: Section 2(a) prevents lessors, landlords, or owners from taking legal action to recover their property for nonpayment of rent or removing tenants during the moratorium period.
-
Loss of Income for Landlords: Section 2(a)(2) and (3) prohibit landlords from collecting late fees, penalties, or increasing rent to recoup costs during the specified period.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Directly protects low-income tenants and homeowners from losing their housing during disasters. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Protects all residents of covered dwellings regardless of legal status. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Explicitly includes Tribal chiefs in the disaster declaration authority. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Ensures people with disabilities are not evicted during times of crisis when relocation is more difficult. Would people in cities be better off under this? — High concentration of renters in urban areas benefit from the eviction moratorium. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Supports populations that are statistically more likely to be renters or face housing instability. Would children be better off under this? — Increases housing stability for families with children during crises. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Supports populations that are statistically more likely to be renters or face housing instability. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides a critical temporary buffer against financial ruin after a disaster. Would retired people be better off under this? — Protects those on fixed incomes from losing their homes during a crisis. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Protects rural homeowners and renters during natural disasters. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Protects vulnerable seniors from eviction or foreclosure during emergencies. Would students be better off under this? — Protects student renters from eviction during disasters. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would men be better off under this? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would union members be better off under this? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Provides general housing security during disaster emergencies. Would women be better off under this? — Generally benefits primary caregivers who are often disproportionately affected by housing instability. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Provides a safety net for renters who may lack significant savings. Would farmers be better off under this? — Protects rural residential properties from foreclosure during agricultural disasters. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Protects homeowners and renters during temporary disaster-related financial hardship. Would business owners be better off under this? — Landlords who rely on rental income as a primary business may suffer financial losses. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Potential negative impact on corporate landlords and real estate investment trusts. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — May negatively impact high-net-worth individuals who own multiple rental properties. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Potential negative impact on large-scale real estate investors.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Explicitly prohibits evictions and foreclosures to prevent homelessness during disaster periods. Does this make housing cost less? — Directly protects the stability of existing housing for low-income residents during emergencies. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Prevents the immediate descent into homelessness for those who lose income during a disaster. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Housing stability measures often disproportionately benefit marginalized communities who are more vulnerable to eviction.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Enhances the scope of disaster relief by providing critical housing stability for affected residents.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Provides significant protections for tenants and homeowners against displacement during disasters. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Small landlords and property management businesses may face loss of income due to the eviction and fee moratorium.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Establishes federal mandates and restrictions on private contracts and property rights during disaster declarations. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Overrides state-level eviction and foreclosure laws within disaster areas.
- 9/3/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
André CarsonDemocrat · Indiana
Judy ChuDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Bennie ThompsonDemocrat · Mississippi