In The News - 6/29/2024
The Spokesman Review
Supreme Court rules homeless camping bans are constitutional, overturning Martin v. Boise
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that laws preventing the homeless from camping on public property are not cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
The 6-3 ruling will have broad implications for local governments across the West, where the 2018 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision Martin v. Boise prevented cities from enforcing camping bans against the homeless if there were not enough available shelter beds.
Friday’s ruling came in favor of Grants Pass, Oregon, where a class action lawsuit claimed that the city’s ordinances against public camping violated the Eighth Amendment.
In the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the Eighth Amendment focuses on what kind of punishment can be imposed after a criminal conviction, not whether a government can criminalize a particular behavior in the first place.
Gorsuch argued that public camping ordinances do not criminalize homelessness because such laws apply to everyone, 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,” Gorsuch wrote.
He further wrote that homelessness is a complicated issue, and it is not the court’s role to dictate policy solutions for the country.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in the dissenting opinion, argued that Grants Pass punished people for not having access to shelter and that punishing their status as homeless is unconstitutional.
“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” Sotomayor wrote. “For some people, sleeping outside is their only option.”
Richard Seaman, a constitutional law professor at the University of Idaho, said the ruling was significant, but not groundbreaking. If the case had gone the other way, he said it would have been a huge break from precedent because it would have created a constitutional right to be housed.
“The Constitution has never been interpreted to provide affirmative benefits like housing,” Seaman said.
And if the court had ruled in favor of the homeless plaintiffs, Seaman said it would have raised tough questions beyond sleeping in public. For example, it could have protected the status of being addicted, which could be used to excuse more severe crimes.
The decision gives clarity to local governments to move forward with their policies without fear of violating the Constitution, Seaman said.
The Grants Pass City Council will discuss options after its legal counsel has a chance to brief them, the city said in a statement.
“We’re thankful that the Court’s ruling will help guide our next steps regarding unhoused members of our community,” the Grants Pass statement said, adding that the city is “committed to assisting residents struggling to find stable housing.”
Similarly in Spokane, spokeswoman Erin Hut said the city’s legal counsel and administration are reviewing the 74-page decision to determine what it means for enforcement of local laws.
Mayor Lisa Brown said that the city will continue to respond to unlawful camping and code violations through police enforcement, Spokane Fire’s behavioral health response and the city’s Homeless Outreach Team.
“I remain committed to community safety and the well-being of all our citizens, which requires a more robust approach than enforcement alone,” Brown said in a statement. “We are committed to getting to the root causes of the unhoused crisis by making investments in mental and behavioral health care, expanding access to substance use treatment, and creating more transitional and permanent housing.”
KREM
Supreme Court decision on camping ban brings mixed reactions from Spokane city leaders
The decision allows cities to enforce stricter bans on homeless people sleeping outside in public places.
In a six to three decision Supreme Court Justices ruled it is *not* cruel and unusual punishment to ban camping in public places. The decision allows cities to enforce stricter bans on homeless people sleeping outside in public places.
Spokane City leaders say this will lead to a cleaner city while homeless advocates, like Maurice Smith, say that won't be the case.
Smith was once the camp manager for Washington State's biggest homeless camp.
"We were concerned that this was going to happen," Smith said. "So it doesn't come as a surprise."
He's now a homeless advocate helping the unhoused in the community. Smith is not pleased with the Supreme Court's decision to enforce stricter bans on homeless people sleeping outside in public places.
Smith said, "I'm hoping that the city of Spokane will tap the brakes on this, because why enforce an ordinance that sends people away without a place for them to go."
Back in September of 2022, then-Mayor Nadine Woodward announced the city would begin enforcing its current sit and lie ordinance. The ordinance allowed the city to remove people from sitting or lying on public sidewalks if there was available shelter space. The city could not enforce the law if there is no shelter space.
"It opens up a lot of opportunities for us as a city to enforce laws that were taken away from us," Spokane City Councilmember Jonathan Bingle said.
But now, with the Supreme Court's decision, the city can remove and prosecute anyone sitting or lying on a public sidewalk if there's shelter space available or not. Bingle says the new decision will lead to a cleaner Spokane.
"This will give us the opportunity to help clean it up a little bit," Bingle said. "We've made serious investments in mental health and in shelter space and in addiction services."
Other homeless advocates like Julie Garcia with Jewels Helping Hands disagree and said the city has to do more.
"We haven't prioritized mass amounts of treatment beds and access to mental health care," Garcia said.
The Center Square
Spokane business community considers recalling mayoral election over homelessness
A group of Spokane business owners are considering a petition to oust the mayor and recall the election that put her into power if she fails to enforce an ordinance that effectively bans homelessness.
Proposition 1 is Spokane’s voter-approved ordinance that prohibits camping within 1,000-feet of a park, daycare or school, whether private or public; however, the ban was never fully enforced due to concerns from law enforcement about the fallout from Martin v. Boise, a 2018 federal court ruling that held that cities cannot enforce anti-camping ordinances if they do not have enough homeless shelter beds available for their homeless population.
Sheldon Jackson, founder and chief executive officer of Selkirk Development, runs an informal newsletter sent to roughly 200 local representatives, including some members of the City Council and Mayor Lisa Brown. He uses the platform to highlight public safety, homelessness and rampant drug use downtown.
In the “SPOTLIGHT” email thread obtained by The Center Square, one businessman called for a petition to recall the November 2023 election that ousted former Mayor Nadine Woodward.
“If a recall petition can be started for the mayor of Oakland, CA, for failure to provide adequate public safety,” wrote Rod Bacon, president of Pass Word Inc., in the thread on Thursday, “there certainly can be a recall petition in Spokane for Lisa Brown if she willfully refuses to enforce Prop 1 and the prohibition against public drug use.”
In a phone call with The Center Square, Bacon confirmed he supports discussing the possibility of a recall petition if Brown fails to enforce Prop 1; however, he thinks it’s inappropriate to entertain the idea any further until a discussion occurs between the mayor and her constituents.