days for nonpayment of rent and 30 days “in any other case, except that if a State or local
law provides for a shorter period of time, such shorter period of time shall apply.” 42
U.S.C. § 1437d(l)(4)(B)-(C) (emphasis added). In addition to the expansive term “any,”
the PFTA explicitly recognizes federalism—declining to override local laws that provide
shorter notice periods. 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(l)(4)(B)-(C) shows that Congress is more than
4
The parties also disagree whether the clear statement rule is confined to construing ambiguous
provisions. In Spector, the Supreme Court applied the clear statement rule to an unambiguous
statute, and in Hayden, 449 F.3d at 325, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held the rule “does
not require courts engaged in statutory interpretation to search for a construction of the statute
that will not affect the federal balance, but rather, reveals the canon to be a default rule.”
(Emphasis added.) Based on Spector and Hayden, we assume without deciding that the clear
statement federalism rule operates as a tool to discern congressional intent and may be applied to
an unambiguous statute.
16
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Hous. Auth. v. Knight, No. 102905-5
capable of regulating in the sensitive area of housing and landlord-tenant while respecting
federalism.
As noted, the clear statement federalism rule requires Congress to make its intent
“‘unmistakably clear’ when enacting statutes that would alter the usual constitutional
balance between the Federal Government and the States.” Hayden, 449 F.3d at 323
(internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Gregory, 501 U.S. at 460). Knight’s
interpretation of the notice requirement would significantly alter this balance. See