Supreme Court Considers Rights of Homeless: Grants Pass v. Johnson
Rights on Trial: Homelessness and Constitutional Justice Clash in High-Stakes Legal Showdown
On Monday, the Supreme Court grappled with the fundamental question of whether arresting individuals for sleeping outdoors violates their Eighth Amendment rights. The case at hand, Grants Pass v. Johnson, came from the city of Grants Pass, Oregon's enforcement of a law prohibiting homeless encampments. The ordinance carries penalties ranging from fines to incarceration for repeat offenders and faced a legal challenge from five homeless citizens.
At the heart of the matter lies the interpretation of the Eighth Amendment, which guards against “cruel and unusual punishment.” The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that outlawing outdoor sleep amounted to a violation of this constitutional safeguard.
However, Supreme Court justices seem largely divided along ideological lines. The conservative bloc appeared inclined to support Grants Pass, expressing reservations about judicial overreach in repealing local ordinances. Justice Kavanaugh stressed this perspective, cautioning against what he termed as "micromanaging" municipal affairs. Liberal justices, on the other hand, were more sympathetic towards the plaintiffs, with Justice Sotomayor emphasizing the biological necessity of sleep and its general exemption from penal measures.
Notably, Justice Gorsuch, a conservative, drew attention to the practical implications of the ruling, asking if a person should be hypothetically allowed to urinate and defecate outdoors because it is a “biological necessity.” This rhetoric emphasized the complexities of the issue and demonstrates the broad ramifications of the Court's upcoming ruling.
The ruling in Grants Pass v. Johnson holds immense significance beyond the confines of Oregon. In an era marked by escalating homelessness and divergent policy responses, the Court's ruling is positioned to affect city policies nationwide. Florida, under the leadership of Governor Ron DeSantis, recently adopted a strict law empowering authorities to corral homeless individuals into government-managed encampments.
Should the Court rule in favor of Grants Pass, cities nationwide are likely to use their expanded power in creating policies aimed at addressing homelessness. However, the ruling's impact may diverge sharply across the ideological spectrum, with liberal-leaning regions exhibiting reluctance towards adopting the stricter measures of their conservative counterparts.
Ultimately, the outcome of Grants Pass v. Johnson holds profound implications for the constitutional rights of the homeless and the struggles of local governments in dealing with one of society's most pressing challenges. As the justices deliberate, their decision will not only shape legal precedents but also shape the lived realities of the nation's most vulnerable citizens.
See the debate unfold for yourself:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2023/23-175_6kh7.pdf
