Supreme Court to consider whether local governments can make it a crime to sleep outside if no inside space is available
Scholars and policymakers have spent many years analyzing the causes of homelessness. They include wage stagnation, shrinking public benefits, inadequate treatment for mental illness and addiction, and the politics of siting affordable housing. There is little disagreement, however, that the simple mismatch between the vast need for affordable housing and the limited supply.
Grants Pass v. Johnson culminates years of struggle over how far cities can go to discourage homeless people from residing within their borders, and whether or when criminal sanctions for actions such as sleeping in public are permissible., the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishment clause forbids criminalizing sleeping in public when a person has no private place to sleep.
They contend that criminalizing sleeping in public when there is no alternative violates the Eighth Amendment in three ways: by criminalizing the"status" of homelessness, by imposing disproportionate punishment on innocent and unavoidable acts, and by imposing punishment without a legitimate deterrent or rehabilitative goal., including from numerous cities and counties that support Grants Pass.
Still, at least some justices may sympathize with the city's argument that upholding the 9th Circuit's ruling"logically would immunize numerous other purportedly involuntary acts from prosecution, such as drug use by addicts, public intoxication by alcoholics, and possession of child pornography by pedophiles." However the court rules, this case will likely affect the health and welfare of thousands of people experiencing homelessness in cities across the U.S.