SCOTUS Denies to Hear NAR’s Petition Over DOJ Probe

The National Association of Realtors’ efforts to impede a Department of Justice investigation into the trade group appears to be at an end.

The Supreme Court issued an order Monday declining to hear NAR’s appeal of a court decision rendered in April, HousingWire reported. No reasoning was provided for the rejected petition, which will allow the appeals court ruling to stand.

In April, a federal appeals court ruled that the DOJ could renew an investigation into NAR, reversing a previous decision.

A spokesperson for the trade group said it “remains committed to taking every possible step to fight for the interests of our members and the consumers they serve.”

NAR filed a writ of certiorari in October, the latest salvo in a legal fight that’s been raging between NAR and the Justice Department since the first Trump administration. The investigation pertained to NAR’s policies regarding agent commissions, including the Participation Rule, which the trade group resolved in the summer.

During the first Trump administration, the DOJ and NAR came to a settlement that would’ve seen the probe dropped in exchange for rule changes. When Joe Biden assumed the presidency, however, the DOJ backed out of the deal to start a “broader investigation,” incensing the trade group and touching off the long legal battle.

In recent months, the DOJ has made its interest in NAR more clear. In a response to NAR’s appeal last month, the Justice Department claimed that its 2020 settlement left open the possibility of reopening an investigation down the line. The agency claimed that during settlement negotiations, it reiterated it would not make any commitments about future investigations.

The agency also filed a Statement of Interest two days before the final settlement hearing in the landmark Sitzer/Burnett commissions case. In the statement, the DOJ said the case’s resolution doesn’t preclude future antitrust litigation and pointed towards the rollout of buyer’s agreements as a potentially harmful practice that could stifle competition.

— Holden Walter-Warner