Washington
New limits for a rent algorithm that prosecutors say let landlords drive up prices
Landlords could no longer rely on rent-pricing software to quietly track each other’s moves and push rents higher using confidential data, under a settlement between RealPage Inc. and federal prosecutors to end what critics said was illegal “algorithmic collusion.”
The deal announced Monday by the Department of Justice follows a yearlong federal antitrust lawsuit, launched during the Biden administration, against the Texas-based software company. RealPage would not have to pay any damages or admit any wrongdoing. The settlement must still be approved by a judge.
RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees nationwide price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage’s clients charge the highest possible rent.
“RealPage was replacing competition with coordination, and renters paid the price,” said DOJ antitrust chief Gail Slater, who emphasized that the settlement avoided a costly, time-consuming trial.
Under the terms of the proposed settlement, RealPage can no longer use that real-time data to determine price recommendations. Instead, the only nonpublic data that can be used to train the software’s algorithm must be at least one year old.
“What does this mean for you and your family?” Slater said in a video statement. “It means more real competition in local housing markets. It means rents set by the market, not by a secret algorithm.”
RealPage attorney Stephen Weissman said the company is pleased the DOJ worked with them to settle the matter.
“There has been a great deal of misinformation about how RealPage’s software works and the value it provides for both housing providers and renters,” Weissman said in a statement. “We believe that RealPage’s historical use of aggregated and anonymized nonpublic data, which include rents that are typically lower than advertised rents, has led to lower rents, less vacancies, and more procompetitive effects.”
Over the past few months, more than two dozen property management companies have reached various settlements over their use of RealPage, including Greystar, the nation’s largest landlord, which agreed to pay $50 million to settle a class action lawsuit, and $7 million to settle a separate lawsuit filed by nine states.
The governors of California and New York signed laws last month to crack down on rent-setting software, and a growing list of cities, including Philadelphia and Seattle, have passed ordinances against the practice.
Ten states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington — had joined the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit. Those states were not part of Monday’s settlement.
Texas
Man charged in deadly shooting at car dealership referred for mental health evaluation
Terrance Jermaine Sandles, 46, of Houston, Tex., will receive a mental health evaluation to determine if he is competent to stand trial, according to Macomb County Prosecutor Peter J. Lucido. He is facing multiple charges including First Degree Premeditated Murder after allegedly killing two men at Star Auto Sales in Shelby Township.
On Monday, Nov. 24, 2025, a Probable Cause Conference was held for Sandles before Judge Stephen S. Sierawski at the 41A District Court in Shelby Township. Sandles’ defense counsel requested an evaluation for Competency. The court granted the request. A Probable Cause Hearing date will be set to review the evaluation results and status of the case.
“Mental health evaluations are a necessary step in the criminal justice process. They allow us to determine whether a defendant is competent to stand trial and ensure that any prosecution proceeds in a manner that is legally sound,” said Lucido.
It is alleged that on Friday, November 7, 2025, Sandles entered the Star Auto Sales office at 47092 Ryan Rd., Shelby Township, and shot and killed two men during a robbery. The men were identified as Marvan Batoo, 40, of Shelby Township, and Ghaith Baban, 48, of Clinton Township. An employee discovered the victims and immediately contacted authorities, reporting that Sandles had a dispute with Star Auto related to a vehicle purchase.
It is further alleged that investigators identified Sandles through the vehicle at the center of the dispute. A thorough police investigation led officers to a hotel in Romulus, where Sandles was arrested. Investigators allegedly recovered evidence linking him to the crime and also discovered a large quantity of cocaine.
After the arraignment, a charge of Controlled Substances – Delivery/Manufacture 50-449 Grams, a 20-year felony, and a related Felony Firearm charge were dismissed because a connection to the jurisdiction of Macomb County could not be established.
Sandles was ordered held without bond and is in custody at the Macomb County Jail.
Montana
AG’s edits to constitutional initiative went too far, State Supreme Court rules
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen went too far in editing ballot language for an initiative calling for nonpartisan court elections, the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
With two judges dissenting, the justices sided with Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts, ruling that changes Knudsen made to Constitutional Initiative 132 would “mislead voters and prevent them from casting an intelligent and informed ballot.”
The initiative, if approved by voters, would amend nonpartisan court races into the Montana Constitution. In October, Knudsen approved CI-132 for signature gathering. To qualify for the November 2026 ballot, the petition needs 60,000 Montana voters to sign on.
But the attorney general also changed the ballot language for CI-132. Knudsen’s language states that “a non-partisan election prohibits labeling candidates on the ballot according to the political party the candidate aligns with,” suggesting that all judicial candidates align with a political party and the initiative would prohibit disclosure.
“We conclude the Attorney General’s proposed Statement does not meet the requirements of (the law), because his wording does not fairly state to the voters what is proposed within CI-132,” Justice James Shea wrote for a four-judge majority.
Chief Justice Cory Swanson and Justice Jim Rice sided somewhat with Knudsen. The attorney general had taken issue with the original CI-132 ballot language suggesting that judicial races would by law “remain” nonpartisan if the initiative passed. Nonpartisan races are the current Montana public policy, but there is no language in the Montana Constitution requiring nonpartisan races for judgeships at all levels.
“This is a proposed amendment of the Constitution, and use of the word ‘remain’ conveys the idea that the Constitution currently provides for nonpartisan elections, which is incorrect,” Rice said in his dissent.
In his dissenting opinion, Swanson connected Knudsen’s subjective assessment of undisclosed judicial partisanship with the well-plied allegations of political bias in the courts made by conservative politicians, including the attorney general. Knudsen has blamed activist judges for the justice department’s high-profile court losses on cases concerning climate change and abortion.
“The attorney general’s description implies the candidate will in fact be affiliated with an organized political party, but that affiliation will remain hidden from the voters,” Swanson said in his dissent. “While I understand this is the working theory of those who advocate for partisan judicial elections — remove the screen which is obscuring the judicial candidate’s loyalties — this theory has not been established as fact for the purposes of the official ballot statement informing voters of the proposed amendment’s substance.
“The proponents and opponents will both argue the merits of this point, but the ballot statement should be as clear as possible and divorced from the campaign.”
Knudsen was right about striking the word “remain” from the original CI-132 language, Swanson concluded.
The court’s majority was less literal than Rice and Swanson about the application of “remain.” Nonpartisan judicial races are the status quo, Shea wrote. Passage of CI-132 would keep court races nonpartisan.
“It does not mislead voters as to what the Montana Constitution currently requires but provides the context that judicial elections are currently nonpartisan and this amendment, if passed, would maintain that status quo,” Shea wrote in the majority opinion. “As we noted above, the current law is the status quo.”
The court unanimously sided with Knudsen’s rejection of a separate proposed ballot issue for making two substantive changes to the Montana Constitution that weren’t closely related.
Ballot Issue 6 required that any new court created be staffed with judges who were elected, not appointed. It also required judicial elections to be nonpartisan.
Knudsen argued that the Ballot Issue 6 subjects would have to be voted on separately to avoid “logrolling” unrelated constitutional amendments into a single vote, potentially confusing voters, or persuading voters to approve a legal change they dislike to obtain a change they do.
Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts also drafted Ballot Issue 6. The group said in a press release Tuesday evening that it was grateful for the prompt ruling on CI-132.
MNC also partnered with another petition group, Montanans for Fair and Impartial Judges, on Oct. 6 to sue over similar attorney general edits to Constitutional Initiative 131, a petition to make nonpartisan races constitutionally secured for state Supreme Court and district courts. That lawsuit remains undecided.
The initiatives follow several failed attempts by Republican legislators earlier this year to allow judicial candidates to declare party affiliation. GOP lawmakers have accused the courts of liberal bias after several laws passed by the Legislature in recent years have been ruled unconstitutional.
New limits for a rent algorithm that prosecutors say let landlords drive up prices
Landlords could no longer rely on rent-pricing software to quietly track each other’s moves and push rents higher using confidential data, under a settlement between RealPage Inc. and federal prosecutors to end what critics said was illegal “algorithmic collusion.”
The deal announced Monday by the Department of Justice follows a yearlong federal antitrust lawsuit, launched during the Biden administration, against the Texas-based software company. RealPage would not have to pay any damages or admit any wrongdoing. The settlement must still be approved by a judge.
RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees nationwide price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage’s clients charge the highest possible rent.
“RealPage was replacing competition with coordination, and renters paid the price,” said DOJ antitrust chief Gail Slater, who emphasized that the settlement avoided a costly, time-consuming trial.
Under the terms of the proposed settlement, RealPage can no longer use that real-time data to determine price recommendations. Instead, the only nonpublic data that can be used to train the software’s algorithm must be at least one year old.
“What does this mean for you and your family?” Slater said in a video statement. “It means more real competition in local housing markets. It means rents set by the market, not by a secret algorithm.”
RealPage attorney Stephen Weissman said the company is pleased the DOJ worked with them to settle the matter.
“There has been a great deal of misinformation about how RealPage’s software works and the value it provides for both housing providers and renters,” Weissman said in a statement. “We believe that RealPage’s historical use of aggregated and anonymized nonpublic data, which include rents that are typically lower than advertised rents, has led to lower rents, less vacancies, and more procompetitive effects.”
Over the past few months, more than two dozen property management companies have reached various settlements over their use of RealPage, including Greystar, the nation’s largest landlord, which agreed to pay $50 million to settle a class action lawsuit, and $7 million to settle a separate lawsuit filed by nine states.
The governors of California and New York signed laws last month to crack down on rent-setting software, and a growing list of cities, including Philadelphia and Seattle, have passed ordinances against the practice.
Ten states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington — had joined the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit. Those states were not part of Monday’s settlement.
Texas
Man charged in deadly shooting at car dealership referred for mental health evaluation
Terrance Jermaine Sandles, 46, of Houston, Tex., will receive a mental health evaluation to determine if he is competent to stand trial, according to Macomb County Prosecutor Peter J. Lucido. He is facing multiple charges including First Degree Premeditated Murder after allegedly killing two men at Star Auto Sales in Shelby Township.
On Monday, Nov. 24, 2025, a Probable Cause Conference was held for Sandles before Judge Stephen S. Sierawski at the 41A District Court in Shelby Township. Sandles’ defense counsel requested an evaluation for Competency. The court granted the request. A Probable Cause Hearing date will be set to review the evaluation results and status of the case.
“Mental health evaluations are a necessary step in the criminal justice process. They allow us to determine whether a defendant is competent to stand trial and ensure that any prosecution proceeds in a manner that is legally sound,” said Lucido.
It is alleged that on Friday, November 7, 2025, Sandles entered the Star Auto Sales office at 47092 Ryan Rd., Shelby Township, and shot and killed two men during a robbery. The men were identified as Marvan Batoo, 40, of Shelby Township, and Ghaith Baban, 48, of Clinton Township. An employee discovered the victims and immediately contacted authorities, reporting that Sandles had a dispute with Star Auto related to a vehicle purchase.
It is further alleged that investigators identified Sandles through the vehicle at the center of the dispute. A thorough police investigation led officers to a hotel in Romulus, where Sandles was arrested. Investigators allegedly recovered evidence linking him to the crime and also discovered a large quantity of cocaine.
After the arraignment, a charge of Controlled Substances – Delivery/Manufacture 50-449 Grams, a 20-year felony, and a related Felony Firearm charge were dismissed because a connection to the jurisdiction of Macomb County could not be established.
Sandles was ordered held without bond and is in custody at the Macomb County Jail.
Montana
AG’s edits to constitutional initiative went too far, State Supreme Court rules
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen went too far in editing ballot language for an initiative calling for nonpartisan court elections, the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
With two judges dissenting, the justices sided with Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts, ruling that changes Knudsen made to Constitutional Initiative 132 would “mislead voters and prevent them from casting an intelligent and informed ballot.”
The initiative, if approved by voters, would amend nonpartisan court races into the Montana Constitution. In October, Knudsen approved CI-132 for signature gathering. To qualify for the November 2026 ballot, the petition needs 60,000 Montana voters to sign on.
But the attorney general also changed the ballot language for CI-132. Knudsen’s language states that “a non-partisan election prohibits labeling candidates on the ballot according to the political party the candidate aligns with,” suggesting that all judicial candidates align with a political party and the initiative would prohibit disclosure.
“We conclude the Attorney General’s proposed Statement does not meet the requirements of (the law), because his wording does not fairly state to the voters what is proposed within CI-132,” Justice James Shea wrote for a four-judge majority.
Chief Justice Cory Swanson and Justice Jim Rice sided somewhat with Knudsen. The attorney general had taken issue with the original CI-132 ballot language suggesting that judicial races would by law “remain” nonpartisan if the initiative passed. Nonpartisan races are the current Montana public policy, but there is no language in the Montana Constitution requiring nonpartisan races for judgeships at all levels.
“This is a proposed amendment of the Constitution, and use of the word ‘remain’ conveys the idea that the Constitution currently provides for nonpartisan elections, which is incorrect,” Rice said in his dissent.
In his dissenting opinion, Swanson connected Knudsen’s subjective assessment of undisclosed judicial partisanship with the well-plied allegations of political bias in the courts made by conservative politicians, including the attorney general. Knudsen has blamed activist judges for the justice department’s high-profile court losses on cases concerning climate change and abortion.
“The attorney general’s description implies the candidate will in fact be affiliated with an organized political party, but that affiliation will remain hidden from the voters,” Swanson said in his dissent. “While I understand this is the working theory of those who advocate for partisan judicial elections — remove the screen which is obscuring the judicial candidate’s loyalties — this theory has not been established as fact for the purposes of the official ballot statement informing voters of the proposed amendment’s substance.
“The proponents and opponents will both argue the merits of this point, but the ballot statement should be as clear as possible and divorced from the campaign.”
Knudsen was right about striking the word “remain” from the original CI-132 language, Swanson concluded.
The court’s majority was less literal than Rice and Swanson about the application of “remain.” Nonpartisan judicial races are the status quo, Shea wrote. Passage of CI-132 would keep court races nonpartisan.
“It does not mislead voters as to what the Montana Constitution currently requires but provides the context that judicial elections are currently nonpartisan and this amendment, if passed, would maintain that status quo,” Shea wrote in the majority opinion. “As we noted above, the current law is the status quo.”
The court unanimously sided with Knudsen’s rejection of a separate proposed ballot issue for making two substantive changes to the Montana Constitution that weren’t closely related.
Ballot Issue 6 required that any new court created be staffed with judges who were elected, not appointed. It also required judicial elections to be nonpartisan.
Knudsen argued that the Ballot Issue 6 subjects would have to be voted on separately to avoid “logrolling” unrelated constitutional amendments into a single vote, potentially confusing voters, or persuading voters to approve a legal change they dislike to obtain a change they do.
Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts also drafted Ballot Issue 6. The group said in a press release Tuesday evening that it was grateful for the prompt ruling on CI-132.
MNC also partnered with another petition group, Montanans for Fair and Impartial Judges, on Oct. 6 to sue over similar attorney general edits to Constitutional Initiative 131, a petition to make nonpartisan races constitutionally secured for state Supreme Court and district courts. That lawsuit remains undecided.
The initiatives follow several failed attempts by Republican legislators earlier this year to allow judicial candidates to declare party affiliation. GOP lawmakers have accused the courts of liberal bias after several laws passed by the Legislature in recent years have been ruled unconstitutional.
