Title: Federal Appeals Court Ruling Upholds Homeless Right to Stay on Streets Unless Communities Provide Shelter
Date: [Insert Date]
Author: Tom Wait
The most powerful federal appeals court in the western United States has once again reaffirmed its decision to prevent cities and towns from forcibly removing the homeless from the streets unless proper shelter is provided. This ruling, which has been hotly debated for years, has dealt a blow to cities across the west coast, including Grants Pass in Oregon.
Grants Pass Mayor Sara Bristol expressed her concerns about the situation, stating, “We are having a situation where the police were telling homeless people that they couldn’t sleep in public or private, and private property. And eventually, that kind of boiled down to homeless people feeling like they couldn’t find a place to rest where they weren’t being harassed.” Bristol acknowledged the deep political divisions within her city and county and the lack of consensus on how to address the issue.
This influential court has previously shaped Los Angeles’ response to the homeless crisis by compelling the city to accept encampments due to a severe shortage of shelters. However, this latest ruling showcased a growing divide among the judges, with several appointees of former President Donald Trump criticizing the homeless for allegedly diminishing the quality of life in many cities. Conservative Judge Milan Smith Jr. argued, “Homelessness is presently the defining public health and safety crisis in the western United States…providing public safety and ensuring that public spaces remain open to all.”
Political expert Jessica Levinson highlighted the impact of Trump’s judicial appointments on the Ninth Circuit Court, saying, “This decision really shows the break in the Ninth Circuit…there is now a solid conservative block.” Nevertheless, she emphasized that the court’s decision to maintain the status quo would not address the need for improvement.
The recent homeless count in Los Angeles revealed a surge in the unhoused population, particularly in areas like Venice and West L.A. Many believe that the status quo is inadequate and called for better solutions. Finn Schmidt, a resident who has experienced homelessness, supported the court’s decision to allow camping when there are no available alternatives. He stated, “At least providing an option where there is shelter so, for people on the street, there is an option to go somewhere where you have a roof above your head.”
Advocates of the court’s ruling argued that it would reduce the harassment faced by unhoused individuals. One resident stated, “I think people are getting called too much to come out and deal with behavior issues…between those who are homeless and they’re just trying to find a place to lay down.”
Overall, the ruling of the powerful federal appeals court maintains the homeless individuals’ right to stay on the streets unless adequate shelter is provided. While it reflects the growing conservative influence within the Ninth Circuit Court, many call for further efforts to address the ongoing homelessness crisis in the western United States.