Strict rent control proposal is struck down in Massachusetts

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck down a ballot proposal that would have imposed the strictest statewide rent control in the US.

The measure sought to limit apartment rent increases to 5% or the annual gain in the Consumer Price Index, whichever is lower. The proposal can't go before voters in November because it includes an exception for religious housing and therefore violates a Massachusetts constitutional ban on religion-related ballot questions, the state's highest appeals court ruled on Tuesday.

Tenant advocates had sought to follow states like California and Washington in adopting rent limits, arguing they were particularly necessary at a time when many Americans are struggling with inflation in everyday goods. The typical Boston rent is about $3,200 a month, roughly 65% higher than the national average, putting it among the top five least affordable metro areas in the US, according to Zillow Group Inc.

While rent increases in Boston have cooled recently with the local economy under threat, the typical cost in May was about 2.5% higher than last year, according to a Zillow report. Massachusetts voters approved a ban on rent control in 1994 that this ballot measure would have overturned. The proposed 5% ceiling is significantly below caps in Oregon, Washington and California, the three places with statewide rent control.

Real estate developers were prepared to mount an expensive advertising campaign against the initiative, warning it would choke off housing construction. Ahead of the ruling, the industry was engaged in discussions about a compromise that would set a more relaxed limit on rent increases at a maximum of 10% and include other developer-favorable provisions.

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, a Democrat running for reelection this year, opposed the ballot question but signaled she was open to a potential compromise. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, who has long called for rent control, has said she'd vote for the measure but similarly preferred a middle ground.

Those discussions will lose urgency after the court's decision. The ruling "puts the issue to rest," Conor Yunits, the chair of the committee opposing the limits, said in a statement. "We look forward to working together to create more homes and tackle affordability through real policy solutions."

But rent control advocates are already plotting to try again. The court's objections are "easily fixable," Noemi Ramos, the chair of the ballot campaign, said in a statement. Supporters will continue to press for rent limits, she said.

The state constitution bans ballot measures related to religion or religious institutions. Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell's office unsuccessfully argued to the court that the proposal passes muster because its main purpose is unrelated to religion and there are also exemptions for secular groups including schools and nonprofits.

The decision marks the second time in less than a week that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck down a ballot proposal with potentially major implications for the state's economy. It ruled late last week that a proposed state income-tax cut couldn't move forward.

(With assistance from Pierre Paulden.)

Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.

This story was originally published June 23, 2026 at 2:17 PM.