One of the more unfortunate things to come out of the pandemic has been the eviction moratoriums imposed by the CDC and several states. The bans are something that, in the short-run, seems like it may help people, but in the long run will disadvantage poor people from housing opportunities.
The bans inherently make renting property a more risky proposal, especially given the unpredictable nature of pandemics. Thus, landlords will require more compensation for the increased risk: higher credit scores, higher down payments, higher rents, etc. The high-marginal-risk renter (ie, the poor/financially unstable renters) will lose opportunities as landlords will be less willing to rent to them given higher costs.
Landlord-tenant laws often already cap down payments/security deposits. And newer reforms have sometimes limited the ability of landlords to use the other means. Only option left for landlords then is to increase rents or exit, which drives rents up further, which has a knock-on effect of driving up home sale prices.
Implicit tests could become a deciding factor by it still depends on the jurisdiction. It's unlikely where judges/juries are likely to side with tenants as a matter of course, which is where these problems tend to be the most prevalent. Any hint of implicit bias by the landlord just gives the trier of fact, the justification it wants to feel vindicated in its predetermined decision.