Supreme Court says ban on homeless camping does not violate Constitution
Supreme Court says ban on homeless camping does not violate Constitution
The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a constitutional challenge to anti-camping laws that allow cities to ban homeless people from sleeping in public spaces — a decision that has significant implications for how local officials address the nation’s homelessness crisis.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court said homelessness is not a status protected by the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, even when a community offers no access to indoor shelter for homeless people.
Writing for the majority, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said the problem of homelessness is complex, but the Eighth Amendment “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.”
The court was reviewing a set of laws from Grants Pass, Ore., at a time when local and state leaders are struggling to deal with the growing number of unhoused individuals nationwide. The decision returns the case to the lower courts, and it was not immediately clear whether Grants Pass would be able to enforce its laws against homeless individuals.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor read her dissent from the bench, saying such laws punish people for being homeless.
“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” said Sotomayor, who was joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
The Supreme Court agreed to take the case after hearing from an unlikely coalition that spanned the political spectrum, including liberals such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and officials in Republican-led states such as Montana and Alabama. The officials described governments overwhelmed by the scale and complexity of homelessness. More than 600,000 people are homeless nationwide, according to federal data, and nearly half sleep outside.
Three homeless people — Debra Blake, Gloria Johnson and John Logan — sued Grants Pass in 2018, after officials started strictly enforcing measures that outlawed sleeping or camping in public spaces like parks and in parked cars.
Fines ranged from $75 to $295. But the penalties increased substantially when unpaid and could eventually result in jail time or a park ban. Blake, Johnson and Logan said the city, with a population of 40,000 people, was punishing them “based on their status of being involuntarily homeless” in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
In 2020, a district court judge barred the city from enforcing its anti-camping ban in parks at night if no other shelter was available.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, which covers Western states, including Oregon, California and Washington, upheld the judge’s decision in 2022. A closely divided 9th Circuit Court refused to have a full complement of judges rehear the case, drawing sharp dissents and warnings of “dire practical consequences” for hundreds of cities and millions of people.
As a result of the 9th Circuit panel’s ruling, the attorney for Grants Pass told the Supreme Court that encampments have multiplied unchecked throughout the West. Restrictions on public camping no longer play a deterrent role, the attorney said, resulting in spikes in violent crime, drug overdoses, disease, fires and hazardous waste.
Lawyers for the homeless individuals said state and local officials are still free to restrict tents in public spaces, to clear encampments and even to fine homeless people who decline other shelter options. But the city cannot punish people with no alternatives, they argued.
The Biden administration charted something of a middle path between the city and the unhoused plaintiffs, telling the court that anti-camping laws are unconstitutional when they target people who have no access to indoor shelter.
This is a developing story. It will be updated.