I want to tell you about a person evicted today in Nebraska.
And I want to tell you this so that you might understand why we are talking about Housing Justice and why these bills in front of the Legislature are important in people's lives.

On the day they will likely become homeless, a tenant called the court this morning to inform them that they were having emergency hernia surgery and couldn't make the hearing. Could they reschedule? Was there anything they could do?

Now, you'll remember if you've been following along that eviction court is the only place in Nebraska that requires the defendant to prove "extraordinary cause" to get a continuance (rescheduled). Everywhere else, it's "ordinary cause".

You might think that this particular circumstance, where the tenant is calling about to go into surgery, might qualify as Extraordinary.

You would be wrong.

The landlord's attorney objected to the possibility of a continuance. Even called into question the veracity of the tenant's claim that they were going into surgery because if it were true, said the attorney, certainly the tenant wouldn't have been able to call the court.

The tenant wasn't there to defend themselves against this attack on their credibility.
Because they were in emergency hernia surgery.

The court denied the request for a continuance. Apparently, being in emergency surgery is not "extraordinary" enough.

The eviction was granted.

This story gets worse, but I want to take a pause here to say that the main arguments against @MattHansenNE LB45 (which would turn "extraordinary" into "ordinary" cause) were: 1. evictions would take longer and LLs would lose money and 2. tenants would abuse the process.

In this case - are either of these arguments valid?
And even if they were, what would be the harm to let the tenant get through surgery before making them homeless? What purpose does this cruelty serve?
What are we doing?
Who are we?

Is this fair? Was this justice?

I mean, was it? Court records show over and over that landlords and their attorneys are regularly granted one-week continuances without them having to call in to request one. If they don't show up, the court will continue the hearing for one week. Doesn't even take a hernia.

"Maybe the tenant could have called earlier this morning?"
Maybe. If the tenant had received the notice of their eviction hearing, maybe they would have called sooner.

But that didn't happen. Instead -

The landlord sent notice of the eviction hearing to the tenant's estranged father who lived in an *entirely different county*.

The only reason the tenant knew about their eviction hearing was because a volunteer advocate delivering rental assistance resources to people facing eviction met the father, who gave the advocate the tenant's phone number, and called them to tell them they were being evicted.

Hundreds of tenants are evicted every year without even knowing they have a hearing because of lazy service of the notice.
LLs in Judiciary, opposing @MattHansenNE LB46 (which would help fix this problem) said this never happens. All tenants know they're being evicted.

"Every tenant knows they're being evicted" is rather besides the point. Did this particular tenant know that they would likely be evicted for nonpayment?
Probably.
Does that knowledge mean it doesn't matter if they know about their eviction hearing?
No.

Over and over and over we hear the opposition to Housing Justice say that the system is working just fine. That even proposing something like LB45 and LB46 would take away their rights.

But what about this tenant's rights?
What about all of our rights in whose name this process is carried out day after day after day?

This system is not working.
This system is not fair.
This system is designed to work exclusively for landlords with no regard for the heavy reality that is an eviction.

This tenant will come out of surgery to find out they don't have a home to go back to.

So I ask again -
What are we doing?