I heard Amanda Seales make the excellent point that the recent supreme court ruling doesn't just effect homeless but, since it's against encampments, it was passed in part to target student protesters making encampments in protest.
I don’t think that’s the case. The decision basically just overturns Martin v Boise and means that each state’s law is the basis for how homeless encampments are regulated. What was so great about Martin was that it meant cities in the 9th Circuit could only sweep camps if there were shelter beds/
that were open/available for those folks. The 9th Circuit had said it was cruel and unusual punishment to criminalize sleeping outdoors when the people essentially had no choice. This Grants Pass decision means those cities can once again criminalize homelessness even if there are no shelter beds.
My understanding is that cities outside of the 9th Circuit have tried to avoid doing sweeps when shelter beds aren’t available, fearing they would get sued under the Martin v Boise theory and lose. Without Martin, cities may now do more sweeps and arrests depending on their state and local laws.
But the laws applicable to encampment protests haven’t changed at all based on Grants Pass. Available shelter beds are irrelevant to protesting arrests.
I think this (Martin v Boise) is why Columbus has recently been so vocal about how they talk to people in camps and offer them services. A lot of times it’s bs because the beds aren’t practically available. But they try to cover their a** by saying they have offered shelter.
