Homeless Enforcement Policies Raise Concerns of Swinging Back and Forth
State Attorney General Rob Bonta has expressed concerns about the potential consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court’s involvement in contentious lower court opinions related to homeless enforcement. He fears that the Supreme Court’s intervention could lead to more severe crackdowns on homeless residents.
The issue revolves around a case in Grants Pass, Oregon, where enforcement of a homeless camping ban was halted by a lower court. This case followed a 2018 ruling by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, known as Martin v. Boise, which prohibited western states from citing homeless individuals for sleeping outside if there was no available shelter. This ruling has limited the ability of cities to clear homeless camps and has sparked debates regarding the adequacy and type of shelter required to comply.
In an amicus brief, attorneys representing Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration argued that the Martin case has “paralyzed communities and blunted the force of even the most common-sense and good-faith laws to limit the impacts of encampments.”
Bonta addressed questions about these homelessness enforcement cases during a live podcast at Voice of San Diego’s Politifest event. While he acknowledged the concerns of Governor Newsom, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, and San Francisco Mayor London Breed regarding the current legal landscape, he expressed worry about potential future developments.
Bonta emphasized the importance of maintaining compassion and humanity when addressing homelessness and providing shelter opportunities for those living on the streets. He cautioned against making homelessness a criminal offense and adopting punitive measures.
Implicit in Bonta’s remarks is the concern that the Supreme Court, which currently has a conservative majority, could take a more punitive stance on addressing homelessness. This could potentially undermine the legal protections established for homeless individuals by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in Martin v. Boise. The fear among homeless advocates is that the Supreme Court’s involvement may lead to a shift in policies that could negatively impact homeless residents.
