Some recent papers in economics challenge one of the central prescriptions of the pro-housing movement: zoning liberalization. I investigate two sets of findings. One paper finds that housing supply has no long-run effect on local rents, while two others find that restricting housing supply might translate into amenities. I review the methods and findings of these papers, as well as contrary findings from related research. I conclude that the bulk of the evidence so far still supports the conclusion that supply-side zoning liberalization typically lowers local rents over meaningful time horizons without generating disamenities substantial enough to overcome the welfare benefits of liberalization.