abstract: 'America has become a nation of homebodies. Rates of interstate mobility,

  by most estimates, have been falling for decades. Interstate mobility

  rates are particularly low and stagnant among disadvantaged groups

  despite a growing connection between mobility and economic opportunity.

  Perhaps most importantly, mobility is declining in regions where it is

  needed most. Americans are not leaving places hit by economic crises,

  resulting in unemployment rates and low wages that linger in these areas

  for decades. And people are not moving to rich regions where the highest

  wages are available.

  This Article advances two central claims. First, declining interstate

  mobility rates create problems for federal macroeconomic policymaking.

  Low rates of interstate mobility make it harder for the Federal Reserve

  to meet both sides of its ``dual mandate{''''}: ensuring both stable

  prices and maximum employment. Low interstate mobility rates also impair

  the efficacy and affordability of federal safety net programs that rely

  on state and local participation, and reduce wealth and growth by

  inhibiting agglomeration economies. While determining an optimal rate of

  interstate mobility is difficult, policies that unnaturally inhibit

  interstate moves worsen national economic problems.

  Second, the Article argues that governments, mostly at the state and

  local levels, have created a huge number of legal barriers to interstate

  mobility. Land-use laws and occupational licensing regimes limit entry

  into local and state labor markets. Different eligibility standards for

  public benefits, public employee pension policies, homeownership

  subsidies, state and local tax regimes, and even basic property law

  rules inhibit exit from low-opportunity states and cities. Furthermore,

  building codes, mobile home bans, federal location-based subsidies,

  legal constraints on knocking down houses, and the problematic structure

  of Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy all limit the capacity of failing

  cities to ``shrink{''''} gracefully, directly reducing exit among some

  populations and increasing the economic and social costs of entry limits

  elsewhere.

  Combining these two insights, the Article shows that big questions of

  macroeconomic policy and performance turn on the content of state and

  local policies usually analyzed using microeconomic tools. Many of the

  legal barriers to interstate mobility emerged or became stricter during

  the period in which interstate mobility declined. While causation is

  difficult to determine, public policies developed by state and local

  governments more interested in guaranteeing local population stability

  than ensuring successful macroeconomic conditions either generated or

  failed to stymie falling mobility rates. The Article concludes by

  suggesting how the federal government could address stagnation in

  interstate mobility.'
affiliation: 'Schleicher, D (Corresponding Author), Yale Law Sch, Law, New Haven,
  CT 06520 USA.

  Schleicher, David, Yale Law Sch, Law, New Haven, CT 06520 USA.'
author: Schleicher, David
author_list:
- family: Schleicher
  given: David
da: '2023-09-28'
eissn: 1939-8611
files: []
issn: 0044-0094
journal: YALE LAW JOURNAL
keywords-plus: 'IMPORT COMPETITION; HOUSING CHOICE; MOBILITY; MARKET; STATE;

  OPPORTUNITY; DECLINE; CITIES; CITY; SEGREGATION'
language: English
month: OCT
number: '1'
number-of-cited-references: '301'
pages: 78-154
papis_id: 31a9f6222679396fa723068177f0df4c
ref: Schleicher2017stucklaw
times-cited: '59'
title: Stuck! The Law and Economics of Residential Stagnation
type: article
unique-id: WOS:000414381000002
usage-count-last-180-days: '0'
usage-count-since-2013: '9'
volume: '127'
web-of-science-categories: Law
year: '2017'