Why not a national homestead law?

[drwex]

A homestead law is a specific exemption (read about MA's homestead law) protecting a person or family's primary residence against seizure for debt repayment. Enacted properly a homestead law could protect peoples' basic shelter needs from things like subprime mortgage foreclosures while denying protection to real estate speculators, who generally don't live in the speculated properties. Several states have such laws to varying degrees (some protect the house as a whole; some protect property up to a fixed limit, etc). I haven't been able to find a reliable data source on how many states already have such laws and how many do not.

Isn't protecting homes that people actually live in and want to continue to maintain a desirable outcome? Why is nobody talking about a national homestead law? It wouldn't prevent people from having massive debts and possibly having to declare bankruptcy, but it would prevent them from losing their homes while they get their financial feet back under them.

I'm wondering if there's some obvious disadvantage that I'm missing (other than to creditors who can't seize and resell negative-equity houses; I'm not crying a lot of tears over this just this moment).

Comments

[feste-sylvain.livejournal.com]

By that logic taking a kidnap victim across state lines shouldn't be a federal case.

I dare say that the inter-state actions of criminals and the jurisdictional issues of extradition do not fall under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

But that doesn't explain why you think it doesn't permit the Feds to establish a baseline standard for homestead protection.

Again, jurisdiction. Who enforces this standard? In which court? To what end?

I have nothing in particular against state-level homestead acts, nor the motives that create them. I'm certain that some implementations are better than others. But I see no need for a Federal baseline, and I see real problems in the Feds enforcing one.