The US Supreme Court has been making headlines this summer, and not in a good way. Millions of Americans are wildly disappointed in the nation’s highest court and, more specifically, its justices.
The most recent controversial ruling from the nine judges overturned a decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that decided being homeless wasn’t illegal. The new ruling could allow local governments to criminalize and even imprison people living without homes for sleeping outside.
The Court Case That Started It All
In 2013, the small town of Grants Pass, Oregon, had 40,000 residents, but only three lived without homes—John Logan, Gloria Johnson, and Debra Blake, who have since passed away.
That year, the local government of Grants Pass decided that they didn’t want anyone living in their town without housing. But instead of finding housing for the three residents, the government passed a law that made sleeping outside illegal and punishable by law enforcement.
Grants Pass v. Johnson
After several years of being issued tickets for sleeping outside, Johnson, Logan, and Blake challenged the city’s ordinance in court. They claimed that the law was being enforced against a specific category of individuals and was, therefore, unconstitutional.
In court, the plaintiffs cited the case of Martin v. Boise (2018), in which the judge prohibited the city in Idaho from banning outdoor sleeping as “the Eighth Amendment prohibits the imposition of criminal penalties for sitting, sleeping, or lying outside on public property for homeless individuals who cannot obtain shelter.”
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Sided With the Homeless of Oregon
After hearing the case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Johnson, Blake, and Logan. The judge noted that the decision on the previous Martin v. Boise case unquestionably applied to those sleeping outside in Oregon, too.
However, that wasn’t the end of the story. Grants Pass, Oregon, took the case to the Supreme Court, hoping that the county’s highest court would overturn the decision. And finally, a decision has been made.
The Supreme Court Overturned the Grants Pass v. Johnson Decision
The nine justices of the Supreme Court heard both sides before deciding that, in this case, the Eighth Amendment’s protection does not apply. Now, here’s where things get a little controversial.
The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution only says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” However, while the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that this clause does apply to fining or punishing those experiencing homelessness, the Supreme Court says it doesn’t.
Laws Against Sleeping Outside Are Not Cruel and Unusual Punishment
While three of the nine Supreme Court Justices voted to retain the original ruling, the other six argued that laws against camping do not qualify as the cruel and unusual punishment that the Eighth Amendment defends.
The justices who voted to overturn also argued that because Grants Pass’s law applied to all people, it was not being enforced against specific individuals as the plaintiffs claimed.
The Law Applies to Everyone and Is Therefore Fair
The decision read, “The public-camping laws prohibit actions undertaken by any person, regardless of status. It makes no difference whether the charged defendant is currently a person experiencing homelessness, a backpacker on vacation, or a student who abandons his dorm room to camp out in protest on the lawn of a municipal building.”
However, there’s no doubt in anyone’s mind that this ruling will affect the nation’s homeless more than anyone else. In fact, many are now worried that local governments around the country will implement similar laws.
The Department of Justice Weighed in on the Case
The Grants Pass v. Johnson case was certainly controversial from the start, and while the Supreme Court was deciding how to rule, the California and Idaho state governments, as well as the US Department of Justice, gave their opinions on the debate.
The Department of Justice argued that the case should be limited so that it upholds the Constitution and allows the homeless protection from cruel and unusual punishment, but also that local governments could implement some outdoor sleeping policies as they saw fit.
Local Governments Can Now Police the Homeless However They Want
However, the Department of Justice’s pleas were ignored, and now, with the Supreme Court’s decision, local governments can essentially police the homeless however they choose.
That includes completely banning people from sleeping outside and distributing civil fines or even arresting the homeless and incarcerating them. Because there is an incredibly large homeless population in the US, this decision could have drastic consequences.
A Complex Issue Cities Should Deal With
Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch said, “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many.” But he said federal judges do not have any “special competence” to decide how cities should deal with this.
“The Constitution’s Eighth Amendment serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges to wrest those rights and responsibilities from the American people and in their place dictate this Nation’s homelessness policy,” he wrote, (via NPR).
Justice Critics the Decision
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2009, said that the decisions focused on the needs of cities but ignored the most vulnerable people.
Stating that sleep is a biological necessity of humanity, the decision leaves homeless people with “an impossible choice—either stay awake or be arrested.”
More than 650,000 People Are Living Without Homes in the US
According to the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, 654,104 people are currently living without homes across the country. The situation is certainly considered a crisis by the federal government, as well as several state governments.
Many political leaders, including President Biden and California Governor Gavin Newsom, have been working tirelessly to find a solution. However, they have yet to find a realistic solution.
Where Do People Go?
Advocates, like Diane Yentel, the president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, say that the decision won’t solve the bigger problem affecting the hundreds of thousands of homeless living in the US.
“Where do people experiencing homelessness go if every community decides to punish them for their homelessness?” Yentel asks.
A Push to Protect Public Health and Safety
Grants Pass and other cities that effectively want to make homelessness illegal argue that the lower court ruling fueled the spread of homeless encampments, which they state could endanger public health and safety.
The decisions made by the lower court did allow cities to restrict when and where people could sleep, and to shut down encampments that posed a threat. However, cities first had to offer people adequate shelter before limiting the amount of people sleeping on the streets.
The Lack of Sheltering
Creating housing for unhoused people has been one of the biggest challenges that many cities are struggling with. Many places do not have nearly enough shelter beds to accommodate overnight stays for people in need of shelter.
Even if beds are available, not everyone will accept them. Local officials reported their frustrations over unhoused people refusing shelter when it is available as the facilities ban pets or prohibit drugs and alcohol.
Impractical Practices
Critics of the lower court’s ruling also note that the ruling was ambiguous, making it impractical to put into practice. However, it is equally impractical to ban homelessness.
Attorneys for the three homeless people in Grants Pass argue that the city’s regulations to discourage sleeping outside are so sweeping that they seemingly make it illegal for someone to sleep or exist without a home.
Making It Illegal to Not Have Housing
Some of the ways that Grants Pass is making it illegal for unhoused people to sleep outside is by banning the use of stoves and sleeping bags, pillows, or other bedding. While the lower districts say that this can only be encouraged if there are alternate shelter options for unhoused, Grants Pass can’t offer any other solution but a night in jail.
The city does not have a public shelter to give the three homeless people in the town an alternative option to the streets. Only a Christian mission, which requires people to attend religious service and imposes various restrictions, offers alternative housing.
Bogging Unhoused Down With Fines
“It’s sort of the bare minimum in what a just society should expect, is that you’re not going to punish someone for something they have no ability to control,” said Ed Johnson of the Oregon Law Center, which represents those who sued the city.
Johnson also noted that imposing fines and criminal records on people who cannot find work or afford housing makes it harder for them to eventually get into housing, creating a vicious cycle that bucks against the city’s wants.
Advocates for America’s Homeless Are Infuriated
Unsurprisingly, advocates for the more than half a million people living without homes in the United States are absolutely infuriated by the Supreme Court’s decision.
Many have argued that implementing excessive fines and even incarceration for sleeping outside are absolutely cruel and unusual punishments for those who literally have nowhere else to do. Even Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor staunchly opposed the decision, stating, “Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. For some people, sleeping outside is their only option.”
Not Solving the Problem at Hand
Johnson, and other advocates, also note that the Supreme Court’s decision won’t change the core problem that many Americans are facing. In the US, the rising rents and severe housing shortage have made housing almost unaffordable or impossible for many.
This has created limited solutions for people who cannot afford housing, with one of them being homelessness.
Where Will the Hundreds of Thousands of People Living Without Homes Go?
As the debate continues regarding the ruling’s unconstitutional and inhumane nature, one important question looms: If local governments inflict a no-camping policy, where will the more than 650,000 people living without homes go?
Right now, there is no answer. There are certainly not enough shelters in the United States to house them, and as rental prices continue to rise, it’s unlikely that they will be able to find accommodation. No one knows quite yet what this ruling will lead to, but it’s likely to cause significant problems for Americans without homes.
Rent Has Skyrocketed While Wages Lag Behind
Rent prices have skyrocketed between 2019 and 2023, jumping 30.4% nationwide. While this wouldn’t be a problem in most cases, wages during that same period have risen 20.2%, according to to recent analysis from online real estate brokers Zillow and StreetEasy.
The gap between wage growth and rent increases is widest in large cities, but towns like Grants Pass still feel its effects.
California Makes an Executive Decision
After the Supreme Court’s decision, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order to remove homeless encampments throughout the Golden State. “We are done,” said Newsom. “It’s time to move with urgency to clean up these sites.”
In a recent post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Newsom urges local governments to urgently and dignifiedly destroy the encampments where thousands of unsheltered Californians live, “with urgency and dignity.”
Fears Become a Reality
Freepik
According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, authorities will arrest and imprison many people for not being able to afford housing in one of the most expensive states in the US, as housing is not necessary before removing encampments.
Newsom’s executive order is exactly what homeless advocates and unhoused people feared would happen after the Supreme Court’s ruling, which takes away any belongings a person may have when authorities take them into custody for their living conditions.
