The Supreme Court is considering whether cities have the right to punish homeless people for camping in public spaces. The case, brought by the city of Grants Pass, Oregon, has drawn attention from both sides of the issue. Advocates for the homeless argue that criminalizing homelessness makes it harder for people to find housing, while city officials say it is necessary to address the impacts of encampments.
The Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a case that could limit the rights of homeless people, but the conservative justices were divided on how far to go. The case originated in Grants Pass, Oregon, where the city passed an ordinance that prohibited sleeping outdoors with as little as a blanket. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the ordinance, ruling that it violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. However, the city appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Ninth Circuit’s ruling was overly broad and was being used to limit its ability to address the growing homeless population.
During oral arguments in a homelessness case, Justice Brown Jackson asked if cities would be permitted to kill homeless people. The case focuses on whether homeless people have a right to sleep outside, as they often have no other space or shelter available. The Supreme Court’s decision could impact major cities with high numbers of homelessness, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The Supreme Court will decide whether three anti-homelessness laws in Grants Pass, Oregon, violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The laws prohibit sleeping on streets, sidewalks, and other public areas and impose fines that lead to jail time for nonpayment, trapping unhoused individuals in a cycle of debt and incarceration.
