Tenant advocates gathered near the House of Representatives chamber on July 29, 2025, ahead of a legislative hearing where they pushed to lift the statewide ban on rent control. Photo by Chris Lisinski | State House News Service
Statewide rent control won’t be decided at the ballot in November following a Supreme Judicial Court ruling striking down the language submitted by supporters as unconstitutional.
The high court ruled that an exemption for properties owned by religious institutions violated the state Constitution’s ban on ballot questions that relate to “religion, religious practices or religious institutions.”
“While we firmly believe that Massachusetts voters were prepared to vote ‘no’ in November, today’s decision puts the issue to rest and protects our housing pipeline and our communities from the proven damage that rent control inflicts,” the Housing for Massachusetts committee, which coordinated the opposition campaign, said in a statement following the decision today.
A spokesperson for the pro-rent control Homes for All Massachusetts coalition noted that a compromise version of rent control by local option is still under review by legislators on Beacon Hill.
The proposed ballot question would have capped annual rent increases at the rate of inflation. The potential compromise legislative version between some developers and rent control advocates would have allowed rent increases at the rate of inflation plus 5 percent, up to 10 percent a year. The compromise would have required approval by legislators and Gov. Maura Healey before July 1 to avert a ballot showdown.
“This decision doesn’t change the fact that high rents are displacing workers and seniors from communities across Massachusetts, forcing people to work multiple jobs just to pay the rent, and making it impossible for young families to save money to achieve the dream of owning a home. And as the state’s housing crisis continues to worsen in the absence of strong tenant protections from greedy corporate investors, we’ll continue advocating for a rent control policy that ensures stable homes and strong communities across Massachusetts,” Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes for All Massachusetts, said in a statement.
Attorney General Andrea Campbell submitted a brief to the SJC supporting the ballot question’s constitutionality, but the court rejected her arguments. Campbell argued that the petition did not discriminate in favor of religious institutions because it also includes exemptions for secular institutions, such as facilities operated for educational and nonprofit uses.
“The presence of secular exemptions does not negate that the petition, on its face, uses religion as ‘a factor in its application,'” the SJC ruled.
A property owners’ group reiterated its opposition to rent caps.
“There is no need for compromise legislation. There is a great need to address the housing crisis, but as we’ve said many times, rent control is not the answer,” MassLandlords Inc. Executive Director Doug Quattrochi said in a statement.
