Bill to let landlords use marshals without court review draws sharp criticism; wholesaling rules also face debate

A bill that would let property owners seek rapid removal of "unauthorized persons" without a court eviction hearing drew widespread opposition at an Insurance and Real Estate Committee public hearing, while other parts of the same measure proposing new disclosure rules for real-estate wholesalers also prompted concern from industry and consumer groups.

Supporters said the removal provision is aimed at true break-ins or people who take over vacant seasonal homes; critics from legal-aid organizations, tenant advocates and state marshals said the language is overbroad and risks stripping long-established due-process protections for occupiers.

Why it matters: Connecticut's summary-process eviction procedure determines who has a legal right to possess a dwelling and includes court review, mediation and limited execution by marshals after a judicial judgment. Opponents say HB 7078's affidavit-driven marshal remedy would permit landlords or new owners to bypass those protections and produce wrongful removals, especially for tenants with oral leases, household members not named on a lease or occupants in lower-income communities.

Court-backed process vs. affidavit enforcement

Raffy Podolsky, an attorney who works on housing law, told the panel that the bill "will have an enormous, undesirable, probably unintended effect on a large number of tenants, thousands, potentially thousands of tenants,"…