The Supreme Court is considering whether cities can criminalize homelessness

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court held an oral argument on whether cities can superb unhoused people for sleeping outdoors in the event that they can’t go to hunt shelter.

The Supreme Court previously declined to listen to a comparable case from Boise, Idaho, in 2019. But over the past 4 years, homelessness rates across the country have increased dramatically. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines homelessness to incorporate each sheltered individuals who live in emergency shelters, transitional shelters, and hotels, and unsheltered individuals who live outdoors in cars or abandoned buildings which were deemed uninhabitable.

Additionally, if someone cannot stick with a friend for greater than 14 days, additionally they fall under this classification. As of January 2023, there have been 653,104 homeless Americans.

In this case, the agricultural town of Grants Pass, Oregon, began imposing $295 fines on people sleeping outdoors as a consequence of skyrocketing housing costs and a rise within the variety of tents in public spaces. As with the lower court ruling within the Boise case, US 9^vol District Court of Appeal based in San Francisco “repealed a law that made it illegal to camp in places where there were not enough shelter beds as cruel and unusual punishment.”

As in most high-profile cases, the justices look like divided on ideological grounds. “Sleep is a biological necessity. It’s a bit like respiratory… But I would not expect you to think about respiratory in public places a criminal offense,” said liberal judge Elena Kagan. “You don’t arrest children who’re covered with blankets. You don’t arrest individuals who sleep on the beach,” Judge Sonia said Sotomayor.

But on the conservative side, Justice Clarence Thomas he skeptically asked, “Have we ever applied the Eighth Amendment to civil penalties?” Judge Samuel Alita asked, “What happens if a person finds this person homeless because of past life choices or their refusal to make future life choices?”

The crux of the argument is whether Grants Pass treats homelessness as a “status.” “Doing so would violate the 1962 case of Robinson v. California, which found it violated the Eighth Amendment, which recognized drug addiction as an illegal “status.” ABC news reports.

If the Supreme Court decides to rule in favor of the Oregon city, it would have far-reaching consequences for homeless people who find themselves currently struggling to make ends meet in cities across the country, which is able to disproportionately impact the Black population.

According to a 2023 article published within the journal ” Journal of ethnic health disparities“[h]“Homelessness is a public health crisis that affects millions of Americans every year.” Additionally, “black Americans are four times more likely to experience homelessness in their lifetime compared to white Americans.”

The Supreme Court is expected to announce its ruling before the tip of June 2024. However, the Biden administration has asked the Supreme Court to remit the case to a lower court. The White House believes that additional evidentiary findings are needed with a purpose to issue a final ruling.