Ruqaiijah Yearby, director of the Center for Public Health Law Research, co-authored research that examines housing laws in five cities including Philadelphia, revealing issues that are affecting renters.

On paper, Philadelphia offers renters significant protections before they can be evicted. Landlords can’t evict a tenant without first participating in a diversion program, and tenants have safeguards against retaliation, illegal lockouts and certain unfair rental practices.

But in practice, those protections don’t always serve renters as they’re intended.

This issue is at the center of research co-authored by Ruqaiijah Yearby, Judge Clifford Scott Green Chair in Law and director of the Center for Public Health Law Research at Temple’s Beasley School of Law.

“Even though Philadelphia is really good in terms of laws protecting tenants, when you enter the courtrooms, judges have discretion, and may not apply the law in the same way,” said Yearby, who joined Beasley in August 2025 and was named director of the Center for Public Health Law Research in October.

Yearby and her co-authors from the Health Justice Collaborative examined housing laws in five American cities, including Philadelphia, looking for gaps in how those laws are enforced. The work was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the researchers published their findings on the collaborative’s website in August.  

The research was conducted in Philadelphia; Detroit; Seattle; St. Louis and Jackson, Mississippi. Across all five cities, researchers found eviction laws were often unclear, inconsistently applied and more likely to favor landlords than tenants.

“The housing laws are not neutral,” Yearby said. “Many of the laws provide protections for landlords and not protections for renters. It’s quite clear that we prioritize a collection of money over someone having safe housing.”

Philadelphia had some of the best protections for tenants out of the five cities studied. Chief among them is an eviction diversion program, which landlords must participate in for at least 30 days before they can evict a tenant, unless there is an imminent threat. The program requires landlords to work with tenants to resolve issues through mediation or direct negotiation support before filing for eviction.

“This mediation process is key, and not something we saw in other places,” Yearby said.

Despite a strong foundation, Yearby and her co-authors identified several issues with Philadelphia’s housing laws and how they are enforced.

Some of Philadelphia’s eviction laws are unclear, the researchers found, and those most affected by the laws often lack familiarity with them.

“Landlords definitely feel they have the right to take tenant stuff, or move tenant stuff, or throw tenant stuff out if the tenants are not paying, but they’re really not supposed to,” said one Philadelphia community member who was interviewed for the research.

The issue extends beyond landlords and tenants. The researchers found that law enforcement officers, attorneys and even judges are unclear on Philadelphia’s laws.

“We showed the same law to three attorneys back-to-back, and they all had different interpretations of the same law,” Yearby said. “So how could you expect a layperson, or a landlord or a tenant, to make sense of the law?”

The researchers also found inconsistencies in the city’s eviction laws and how judges apply them.

One legal stakeholder interviewed for the study compared Philadelphia’s eviction court process to a game of chance, where outcomes often depend on which judge or legal service provider is present on a given day.  

“I often explain to clients that coming to municipal court is a lot like coming to a casino,” they said. “There are many, many, many luck factors here that determine the outcome that you’re going to get on any particular day. Which judge is sitting, which attorney from community legal services is there that day or which commissioner can affect the outcome you’re going to receive.”

The researchers also found that some judges decline to apply certain housing laws because they disagree with them.

For example, Philadelphia requires landlords to provide lead-safe certificates to tenants, and without a signed certificate, landlords cannot collect rent.  

But the researchers found that some judges feel the law is invalid and will not allow tenants to argue that their landlord failed to fulfill the lead-safe certificate requirement. One legal stakeholder said judges will rule in favor of landlords and evict a tenant, rather than apply the lead law.

In their published report, the researchers offered suggestions for how legal stakeholders can partner with tenants and tenant advocacy groups to implement changes and work toward more equitable outcomes.  

One suggestion is to organize a truth and reconciliation process, where legal stakeholders acknowledge their lack of familiarity and inconsistent application of the laws. The process should also provide opportunities for tenants to tell legal stakeholders about the harm tenants have suffered, the researchers say.

Another recommendation is to create a publicly accessible website with best practices for the equitable enforcement of housing laws.

Street Democracy, a legal services organization in Detroit involved with the study, created a website containing best practices from different cities that could serve as a model.

The researchers also recommend that the government directly provide tenants with financial support, such as rental assistance, instead of giving the money to landlords, to ensure that tenants harmed by the housing system actually receive the benefit.

The research relied heavily on stakeholder interviews, which uncovered information not found in the available legal data. It is an approach that Yearby wants to bring to future research projects conducted by the Center for Public Health Law Research to ensure the center is addressing problems that matter most to the community.

“Landlords aren’t happy. Tenants aren’t happy. Regulators aren’t happy,” Yearby said. “So let’s talk about the problems with housing enforcement, particularly related to evictions, listen to the suggestions from those affected and make changes.”