Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Housing Policy

California Bill Would Cap Rents During U.S.-Involved War

The war in Iran is causing California lawmakers to consider wider price controls.

Christian Britschgi | 8.25.2026 3:45 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Rent control | WalkingPenguin/Dreamstime
(WalkingPenguin/Dreamstime)

Happy Tuesday, and welcome to another edition of Rent Free.

This week's stories include a look at a bill that would impose universal rent control over California anytime officials determine that an overseas conflict is raising housing prices.

Additionally, the newsletter covers housing and transportation policy advocate Charles Marohn's First Amendment victory over licensing officials who tried to fine him for referring to himself as an engineer.


War=Rent Control? 

Until the U.S. adopts Ron Paul's foreign policy, California landlords will have the threat of universal rent control hanging over their heads.

That would be the reality under legislation put forward by California state Sen. Josh Becker (D–Menlo Park) that adds war to the emergencies that can trigger the state's price-gouging law.

Rent Free Newsletter by Christian Britschgi. Get more of Christian's urban regulation, development, and zoning coverage.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The state's current law forbids businesses from raising prices by more than 10 percent whenever the president, governor, or local government declares an emergency in response to fires, floods, riots, pandemics, etc.

Those price controls apply to a wide range of food items, emergency supplies, building materials, and rents and last for at least 30 days, but they can be extended indefinitely.

Becker's bill would allow the governor to declare a state of emergency triggering those price controls whenever Congress declares war, the U.S. is participating in a United Nations peacekeeping operation, or the U.S. is "engaged in active military operations against any foreign state, whether or not war has been formally declared."

"California should not become collateral damage in an international conflict," he said in a recent committee hearing in which he pitched his bill as a response to the gas price increases.

The legislation includes some additional checks on when price controls can be imposed because of war.

Only a presidential or gubernatorial emergency declaration could trigger war-related price controls. The state's attorney general would have to find some nexus between a war and the rising price of a good before the 10 percent price cap is imposed. The price caps could only be extended once for another 30 days, meaning they could only last up to 60 days total.

California's landlords are opposing the bill, arguing that the wide-ranging and vague definition of "war" would create compliance uncertainty and criminal liability for property owners who raise rents while some overseas conflict is ongoing.

Already, the state's attorney general has made a point of prosecuting landlords who've raised rental prices following last year's wildfires.

The state's rent control regime is also already quite complex. Many localities have legacy rent control laws that cap rents on older housing at typically a few percentage points each year. There's also a statewide rent control law that limits rent increases to a maximum of 10 percent on housing that's at least 15 years old.

Becker's bill would add a third layer of rent control that's sporadically triggered by a foreign conflict and, once triggered, would subject a rental housing owner to potential criminal penalties. 


Housing Advocate and 'Professional Engineer' Wins First Amendment Case 

After a yearslong legal battle with Minnesota licensing officials, Charles Marohn, president of the advocacy group Strong Towns, has won his First Amendment battle with licensing officials over his right to call himself a "professional engineer."

Marohn worked as a licensed civil engineer for many years before becoming a full-time activist and writer. His work at Strong Towns is often critical of modern traffic engineering practices and public works projects.

That's earned him some critics within the profession, one of whom filed a complaint against him in 2020 when he saw that Marohn was referring to himself in speeches and author bios as an engineer despite his license having lapsed.

That initial complaint turned into a formal sanction in 2022, when Minnesota's Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture, Geoscience, and Interior Design fined and censured Marohn for calling himself an engineer in the context of his advocacy work.

In response to the board's sanction, Marohn sued. He argued that because he had been describing himself as an engineer in the context of his public advocacy, and not to solicit engineering business, he had a First Amendment right to use the title.

Last week, in the U.S. District Court for Minnesota, Judge Nancy E. Brasel granted summary judgment in favor of Marohn's First Amendment claim.

The board had argued that it was allowed to police who call themselves engineers as part of its mission to license the profession and protect public safety. Because Marohn has used the term in a professional context while lacking a license, it could fine him.

Brasel rejected this argument, ruling that Marohn's use of the term engineer was "part and parcel" of his advocacy work, not state-regulated engineering work. That meant any sanction on him for using the term needed to clear the Supreme Court's strict scrutiny standard, which the board failed to meet.

In similar cases out of Oregon and North Carolina, federal courts have generally sided with the free speech rights of the unlicensed engineers doing public advocacy in their fights with licensing boards.

"It is quite a vindication," Marohn says of the ruling in his case. 

"For me personally, having the state say for six years that I lied, had misrepresented myself to the public, was not only hurtful but was really painful to hear," he tells Reason. "The engineering profession needs reform. It needs dialogue. The precedent my discipline had created was just really chilling in the profession."


Quick Links 

  • If you'll forgive the self-promotion, I have an article in the new print issue of Reason making the case that Euclidean zoning is, in fact, named after Euclid. 
  • Opponents of California's Proposition 45, which would dramatically reduce the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act, are making the potential for unchecked data center development a key argument against the initiative. The proponents of Prop. 45 say data center projects would not be affected by the proposition.
  • The Independent Institute on why many of California's zoning reforms have underperformed. 
  • Lawmakers have weakened a pending bill that aims to prevent fire-affected single-family properties in the Los Angeles area from being turned into denser housing. As Politico reports, author state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D–Pasadena) amended the bill to allow duplexes to be built. The bill would still prevent 10-unit subdivisions currently allowed by state law from being built in fire-affected areas.
  • San Francisco area developers predict a building boom following rising rents and the city's reduction of affordable housing mandates.

Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: The Freedom 250 IndyCar Race Only Looked Like MAGA Propaganda if You Already Hate Trump

Christian Britschgi is a reporter at Reason.

Housing PolicyRent controlPrice controlsAffordable HousingCaliforniaWarEndless WarFirst AmendmentOccupational LicensingState GovernmentsLegislationLaw & Government
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (24)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Rick James   2 months ago

    Californians voted for it.

    1. JFree   2 months ago

      Californians should lose their voting privileges outside CA.

      1. Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)   2 months ago

        They should loose their voting privligas inside California too

  2. Rick James   2 months ago

    Here's another bill that recently passed that... frankly, I'm shocked Reason hasn't covered (as far as I can tell). The impact to the Priscilla Villarreals of the world is significant, in my estimation, yet not a peep.

    Assembly Bill 2624, named the “Safe at Work Act,” would allow immigration support services providers to protect themselves from harassment and violence by removing their addresses from the public record. It would also prohibit others from publishing these individuals’ addresses or other personal data online for the purpose of violence or harassment. The measure passed both chambers along party lines.

    1. Homer Thompson   2 months ago

      thinking the exact same thing

    2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      Icwydt.

    3. damikesc   2 months ago

      Don't those tax exempt groups STILL have to submit documentation to the IRS?

      Just saying --- the addresses can be found out easily enough.

  3. Rick James   2 months ago

    Opponents of California's Proposition 45, which would dramatically reduce the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act, are making the potential for unchecked data center development a key argument against the initiative. The proponents of Prop. 45 say data center projects would not be affected by the proposition.

    FYI, here's the best quick summary of the whole Data Center kerfuffle I've heard so far. Clipped at the relevant time.

  4. Zeb   2 months ago

    Rent control for Smurf houses? Or are those little red penises?

    1. Its_Not_Inevitable   2 months ago

      From what I can see of the "woman" holding the sign, it might be a self portrait.

    2. MWAocdoc   2 months ago

      I think they are stylized acorns. Perhaps in reference to the nuts who espouse rent control? Or maybe a reference to the squirrels who march down streets chanting idiotic slogans with their faces painted?

  5. MWAocdoc   2 months ago

    Dear California: "Go ahead! Make my day!" Although not everyone who lives in California voted for socialist authoritarian government and, perhaps, does not deserve to be punished just because they happen to live there; all of them surely must have seen the writing on the wall long ago. So anyone who still lives there cannot complain that they did not see this coming. After successive waves of emigration with each new Sacramento command-and-control initiative the remaining sane people have less and less excuse for still being there. If this craziness causes a new wave of landlord exodus and no one remains in California to rent living space to the socialists, what will that look like? And with a huge inventory of unowned rental space left with no landlords, will it remain vacant with more people living on the streets homeless? Or will the state confiscate the vacant rentals and fill them with the homeless, further draining state coffers? And what about the loss of revenue from abandoned real estate? Enquiring minds want to know!

    1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

      Soon: Everyone gets to live in Cabrini Green housing.

    2. Eeyore   2 months ago

      During COVID, two nearby businesses on the same street had to close due to "fires". I suspect something similar might happen.

  6. Eeyore   2 months ago

    Why not just make charging rent illegal?

    1. MWAocdoc   2 months ago

      Yeah! Why not? Again: "Go ahead! Make my day!"

    2. Corey   2 months ago

      Give them time. They'll get there. Eventually rental property owners will need to apply to the state of California for a permit allowing them to collect rent. Or maybe California will implement an escrow system in which rent is paid to the state and then they'll decide if - and how much of - it gets released to the property owner. It's important to note that taxes will still be due even on uncollected rent.

    3. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      Why cant everyone just get a free million dollar home like DSA trust fund babies get?

    4. middlefinger   2 months ago

      That’s legal.

      “After 30 days in California, squatters gain full tenant rights, and they can hold your apartment hostage for a ransom. Professional squatters now demand $15K–$35K “cash for keys” just to leave. This is theft.

      When a tenant decides to steal an apartment, the property owner is not only losing money on lost rent payments, but they are forced to rack up legal expenses as they navigate an onerous eviction process that is fundamentally stacked against them. The result of this broken system is that many housing providers would rather lose money by leaving an apartment entirely vacant, than risk the costs of dealing with a delinquent and unscrupulous tenant.

      This creates an artificial scarcity of housing, and an intractable financial burden for the landlord. If every housing provider must factor in a $100K legal “squatter removal” fund with every unit, no amount of housing construction can remove that financial pressure on the supply side, and these costs will be passed down to the tenants, in perpetuity. We cannot expect property owners to provide housing at a loss.”

      Spencer Pratt “The Phantom Housing Crisis” Substack

  7. Dillinger   2 months ago

    >>The war in Iran is causing California lawmakers to consider wider price controls.

    Being California lawmakers creates opportunity for California lawmakers to consider power expansion

  8. Torguud   2 months ago

    Take money under the table. Simple.

  9. Social Justice is neither   2 months ago

    If there were sense to the Cali bill it would only apply to active, deployed servicemen and women so they're not looking for housing from halfway around the world. But it's Cali so I assume it's just a means to shaft Capitalism and enable their Antifa foot soldiers.

  10. TJJ2000   2 months ago

    More price-fixing will make it affordable!!! /s

    Ya know like healthcare that jumped 5-6 Times in costs.
    Ya know like mortgages that jumped 4-5 Times in costs.
    Ya know like education that jumped 3-4 Times in costs.
    Ya know like energy that jumped 2 Times in costs just since 2000.

    All predictable consequences of people believing their 'Guns' (government) would grow legs and make them something for nothing. Forceful Taking doesn't expand supply.

  11. car-keynes   2 months ago

    Looks like nothing a more thoughtful contract couldn't solve.

    For example, if these price controls concern commissioned soldiers who can't show up to manage their personal property, then a clause to designate a party responsible for the very possessions in event of any number of disasters (rent control, flood, fire, condemning the building, etc.) could help. If a landlord is not willing to implement rent control or cannot do anything about the building being condemned, etc, then calling the charged person to move out all the personal possessions could be a viable option. Contracts have to mature to handle exceptions and foresee needs since landlords are not government entities.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Pamela Colloff on America's Biggest Jailhouse Snitch, Wrongful Convictions, and Criminal Justice

Billy Binion | From the November 2026 issue

Police Destroyed Their Homes and Businesses. The Supreme Court Won't Say Who Should Pay.

Billy Binion | 10.25.2026 7:00 AM

Vinay Prasad on Anthony Fauci, COVID-19 Restrictions, and RFK Jr.

Zach Weissmueller | From the November 2026 issue

Iowa Voters Don't Want Police or Flock Tracking Their Cars. Politicians Are Still Catching Up.

Davide Mamone | 10.24.2026 8:00 AM

Trump Wants To Force Data Centers To 'Make Their Own Electricity.' Deregulation Would Work Better.

Josh Pauzé | 10.23.2026 5:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Reason

The All-Argentina Issue is Here

New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change. Out now for subscribers.

Subscribe & Start Reading Learn More