The US Supreme Court recently held oral arguments on the topic of enforcing public camping ordinances against unhoused people (who don’t have access to adequate shelter), an act that could possibly be deemed as cruel and unusual punishment as prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. The case in question, Grants Pass v. Johnson, came from southern Oregon, and centers on the city’s ordinances which prohibit unhoused individuals from sleeping in public spaces.
During the oral arguments that lasted for around two-and-a-half hours, the discussion mainly focused on the distinction between status and conduct. A historical reference was made to the 1962 case Robinson v. California, in which the Supreme Court held it unconstitutional for a state to punish an individual for being a drug addict (status) instead of for committing a specific act like selling drugs (conduct). In the current case, respondents argued that the ordinances imposed by Grants Pass essentially criminalize the status of being unhoused in the city.
However, the city’s representative, Theane Evangelis, claimed that this case does not involve status, but rather, it focuses on violations of public camping laws. They argue that penalties are imposed on unhoused individuals for their actions, not for their status.
The legal complaint for this case dates back to 2018. The assertion made was that individuals in Grants Pass who had to sleep outside faced fines and citations when they had no access to shelters. The city’s homelessness-related ordinances were deemed unconstitutional by a district court in 2020. Its appeal to the 9th Circuit Court saw the decision upheld. This led to the city appealing to the Supreme Court.
The homelessness issue has been a growing concern in various US cities as a national housing crisis looms large. The 2023 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report states that on a single night in 2023, approximately 653,100 people, or about 20 out of every 10,000 people in the United States, were homeless. The report notes that amongst these numbers, six out of ten people were staying in an emergency shelter, transitional housing, or safe have program, while the rest were experiencing unsheltered homelessness, living in places unsuited for human habitation.
As legal professionals eagerly wait for a verdict on ‘Grants Pass v. Johnson’ this summer, the case continues to stir debate on the regulation of homelessness across municipalities in the U.S. The ruling could indeed be a pivotal moment in shaping the policies regarding public camping and homelessness.