This page is informational and does not constitute legal advice.
Manning v. Kish
Challenging California's Section 8 Mandate
Can California require landlords to participate in Section 8 when participation requires them to consent to government inspections?
The Fourth Amendment Argument
Section 8 participation requires government inspections
Can the government mandate participation and then call the inspection consensual?
That's the Fourth Amendment question at the center of Manning v. Kish.
What This Case Is Not About
The lawsuit does not seek to eliminate Section 8 or prevent landlords from voluntarily accepting vouchers. It challenges California's requirement that landlords participate.
Video About the Lawsuit
This video explains why Tower Bridge brought the challenge and why a related New York decision is part of the public discussion. It is informational only.
About the Lawsuit
Section 8 is a voluntary federal program. California law effectively requires landlords to take part. Taking part means more than accepting a voucher as rent: landlords must enter a Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract and agree to government inspections and access to the property and certain records.
The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable government searches. A landlord who chooses to join Section 8 can choose to agree to those inspections. This case asks whether the government can force a landlord into the program and then rely on that forced participation as consent to inspect.
Why Tower Bridge Filed This Lawsuit
Tower Bridge manages residential rentals in the Sacramento area. California's requirement affects the owners we represent and the decisions we make every day. The three points below summarize the claim as presented in the complaint and on our blog — they are the plaintiffs' arguments, not a court ruling.
The Law
California requires landlords to accept otherwise qualified applicants who use Section 8 vouchers. Accepting a voucher means signing a HAP contract and agreeing to inspections and government access to the unit and related records.
The Constitutional Question
Can the state require participation in a voluntary federal program and then treat that requirement as consent to warrantless inspections that a landlord could otherwise refuse?
The Requested Outcome
The complaint asks the court to declare the requirement unconstitutional to the extent it forces landlords to surrender Fourth Amendment protections, and to stop enforcement on that basis. The court has not ruled on that request.
A New York Court Has Already Considered a Similar Question
Matter of People of the State of New York v. Commons West, LLC, NY Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, 2026 NY Slip Op 01253.
A New York appellate court addressed a similar requirement in 2026. The same basic question — whether a state may require landlords to participate in Section 8, and with that participation to consent to government inspections — is now before the Eastern District of California.
This New York decision is not binding on the federal court in California. It does not control the outcome of Manning v. Kish, and California's law has not been declared unconstitutional.
Latest Case Update
July 17, 2026
Lawsuit Filed
Tower Bridge Property Management and Thomas Manning filed Manning v. Kish in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Read the Complaint →Full timeline below
Case Updates
July 17, 2026
Lawsuit Filed
Tower Bridge Property Management and Thomas Manning filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, case caption Manning v. Kish.
Read the FilingMedia Coverage
The Center Square · July 28, 2026
Lawsuit: California law forcing landlords to accept Section 8 unconstitutional
Read Article →SFist · July 24, 2026
Landlord Sues California, Argues Section 8 Rules Violate Property Owners' Civil Rights
Read Article →SFGATE / CalMatters · July 27, 2026
California Landlord Fights Law Meant To Help Low-Income Renters
Read Article →CalMatters · July 24, 2026
Law meant to help low-income renters challenged by CA landlord
Read Article →Yahoo News · July 23, 2026
Landlord sues California, saying Section 8 contracts violate rights
Read Article →Daily Journal · July 20, 2026
Landlord challenges California's Section 8 requirements
Read Article →Court Documents
Complaint
Manning v. Kish complaint
The complaint filed July 17, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.
View PDFThis page is for informational and educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. The California lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the state's requirements; the federal court has not yet ruled on that question.