Today, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. of the United States Supreme Court denied an emergency request to delay implementation of New Jersey’s landmark 2024 affordable housing law (A4/S50).
The Supreme Court’s decision follows a string of decisive losses for opponents of affordable housing in New Jersey. On January 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied an emergency appeal in a one-page order issued by Judges Cindy K. Chung and D. Michael Fisher. That ruling came shortly after U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi dismissed the municipalities’ federal lawsuit and denied their request to delay the law’s implementation.
Judge Quraishi’s decision rejected arguments already dismissed repeatedly by New Jersey state courts. Last September, Mercer County Superior Court Judge Robert T. Lougy dismissed with prejudice a similar lawsuit brought by the same group of municipalities. Those claims were also previously rejected in two failed attempts to stay the law, two failed emergent applications to the Appellate Division, and a failed emergent application to the New Jersey Supreme Court. Today’s decision thus represents the eighth rejection of these arguments by every level of both the state and federal court system.
The lawsuit was brought by three dozen municipalities, led by the Borough of Montvale, including many of the wealthiest and most historically exclusionary towns in the state. Using their local taxpayer dollars, they first filed a case in 2024 attempting to undermine New Jersey’s affordable housing framework, which requires each municipality to allow its fair share of affordable housing.
Following the successful implementation of A4/S50, the vast majority of New Jersey’s municipalities are now creating affordable housing. After the Dec. 31 deadline to resolve challenges to municipal housing plans through mediation, Fair Share Housing Center announced that approximately 380 municipalities have developed compliant plans — an unprecedented level of participation in the state’s affordable housing process.
“This was a far-fetched effort to undermine and delay a law that is already working wonders,” said Joshua Bauers, director of exclusionary zoning litigation at Fair Share Housing Center. “At every level — state courts, federal district court, the Third Circuit, and now the U.S. Supreme Court — these arguments have been rejected.”
“The overwhelming majority of municipalities are embracing New Jersey’s affordable housing law and moving ahead with implementation. With the Supreme Court rejecting this appeal, it’s time to focus on creating the affordable homes New Jerseyans urgently need,” he added.
In New Jersey, the constitutional obligation for each municipality to allow its fair share of affordable homes, known as the Mount Laurel Doctrine, is recalculated every 10 years in cycles known as Rounds. Each municipality’s obligations are calculated by looking at factors in various regions of the state — such as job growth, existing affordability, and the growth of low- and moderate-income households — which determines an individualized requirement for affordable housing.
Ahead of the Fourth Round of Obligations that started in 2025, A4/S50 streamlined the affordable housing development process and codified the methodology used to determine each municipality’s obligations over the next decade. The legislation’s primary sponsors were Senate President Nicholas Scutari, Senate Majority Leader Teresa Ruiz, State Senator Troy Singleton, Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin, and State Assemblymembers Yvonne Lopez, Benjie Wimberly, and Verlina Reynolds-Jackson.
New Jersey’s law gives towns a wide variety of tools to create affordable housing in the way they prefer. Municipalities can choose from a range of options — such as 100% affordable housing, mixed-income housing, supportive housing for people with special needs, or repurposing abandoned malls or offices. Towns only lose their ability to be in control of the process when they refuse to allow any affordable housing.
One claim raised in the lawsuit — that urban municipalities do not have affordable housing obligations — is simply false. Because urban municipalities have historically produced far more affordable housing than suburban towns, their obligations largely involve rehabilitating thousands of existing homes — which often far exceed suburban obligations in total.
To view each municipality’s housing plan, visit the Affordable Housing Dispute Resolution Program and click through the counties on the left column. This website is itself a product of the new law, which for the first time requires all municipal housing plans to be publicly available upon filing.“Using taxpayer dollars to prolong this litigation has only hurt the towns pursuing it,” Bauers added. “New Jersey’s law gives towns broad flexibility to create affordable housing in ways that support workers, small businesses, and local economies. Most of New Jersey’s local leaders recognize this and are already moving forward with thoughtful housing plans.”
