By Noah Kubacki
The Supreme Court is ruling on whether it is a cruel and unusual punishment to fine homeless people for "camping." The initial reason for this case came out of Grants Pass, Orgeon. In 2013, the city council agreed upon initiatives to make the city less accommodating to the unhoused. The order prohibits the use of pillows, blankets, and cardboard while sleeping outside. If caught, the city fines the individual $295. If the fine goes unpaid, the charge increases to $537.60, further discouraging the person from living there. Following two citations, the city orders a ban on the individual from city property. If the individual is found on city property, they are charged with criminal trespassing. This charge can also include 30 days in jail and an additional fine of $1250. Through a legthy set of arbitray ordances, the city has effectively found a route to punish and criminalize homelessness.
A previous precedent, Martin V. Boise, challenges the actions of Grants Pass. In Martin V. Boise, six individuals were cited for sleeping on public property. The defense presented by Howard Belodoff argued that it was cruel punishment for officers to arrest and cite people with nowhere else to go. Due to the individuals being unable to go anywhere else, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed that the acts of the officers were unconstitutional. Johnson V. Grants Pass shares similar themes with Martin V. Boise. It is probable that the court will use a similar defense as Martin V. Boise, citing the controdictory nature of punishing people with no other place to go. However, Grants Pass could theoretically argue that the individuals cited were offered shelter but refused to take it. The Martin V. Boise ruling stated that it is cruel to cite someone with no place to go; if a homeless person is offered a spot at a shelter and refuses, then the citation would technically be valid.
The focus of the arguments presented will hang on if the residents arrested in Grants Pass are willingly choosing to be homeless. Both parties will most likely present documentation that disagrees with each other's narrative. A decision is predicted to be released by late June.