Supreme Court rightly lets communities choose how to respond to homelessness

The Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson will save lives by allowing local governments and law enforcement agencies to determine how best to respond to homelessness in their own communities. In many cases, that will mean intervening in homeless encampments that are dangerous both to the people living in them and nearby communities.

The overreach of the federal court system into local homeless policy over the last six years has proven disastrous in the Western United States. Encampments have been allowed to grow while state and local governments have been left without recourse to intervene. This ruling will prevent future misguided attempts to strip communities of important tools to help homeless individuals access the critical care and resources they need to keep the streets clear of encampments so communities can thrive as well.

Most municipalities have laws that prevent individuals from sleeping or setting up camps without permission in parks, in open lots, or on sidewalks. These laws serve an essential function in maintaining basic order. If someone is sleeping somewhere they're not supposed to, then law enforcement is empowered to remove them. However, in the context of street homelessness, there is an additional and equally important function: Connecting individuals with basic care and shelter. If they are unwell, these interventions also connect them with other resources they need.

Homeless outreach teams work hard to locate and offer services to homeless individuals. However, a growing number of homeless individuals are refusing these voluntary services and shelter options, becoming what is referred to as “shelter resistant.” Shelter-resistant individuals are often the most unwell in terms of mental health and substance addiction.

In the last five years , unsheltered homelessness has risen 32% nationwide , now making up 39% of the country’s homeless population. In 14 states, unsheltered homelessness has increased more than 75% since 2018.

Other aspects of homelessness have changed considerably as well. Since 2018, the number of unsheltered homeless people with severe mental illness has grown 29% . Homeless individuals with substance abuse disorders has grown 59% nationally.

Leaving people suffering from severe mental illness or drug addiction to live in squalor on the street is unacceptable public policy. Moreover, it is demonstrably dangerous. The mortality rate among unsheltered homeless individuals is 2.7 times higher than it is for those living in safe, hygienic shelters.

Local governments and law enforcement agencies understand these problems, which is why most communities try to respond to encampments that homeless outreach teams fail to clear voluntarily. But these efforts were upended in parts of the Western U.S. with the 2018 federal court ruling in Martin v. Boise .

This ruling was an early victory for a vocal campaign by advocacy groups to “end the criminalization of homeless,” known as Housing, Not Handcuffs . Advocates’ efforts to thwart local enforcement of laws against unauthorized street camping became far more active around the country in the years that followed.

These efforts hurt vulnerable populations in two critical ways. They underestimate the dire need to care for people living on the street and mischaracterize the interventions necessary to help them receive that care. A University of California, San Francisco, study of homelessness found that only 4% of homeless individuals cited housing costs as the primary reason they are homeless, while 80% of homeless individuals had pressing behavioral health needs. Cities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles have invested billions of dollars in housing-focused policies while ignoring their sprawling encampments . The result has left thousands of homeless individuals on the streets.

The misalignment between the hollow rhetoric from Housing, Not Handcuffs, and the reality check on the streets of America’s cities has left many communities with policy whiplash. The Austin City Council in Texas ended its public camping ban in 2019, only to have it reinstated by voters in a popular referendum two years later. In Utah this year, legislators repealed a disturbing exception to the state’s camping ban that had prohibited law enforcement from closing homeless encampments and requiring people to seek shelter indoors ahead of severely cold weather events. That exception could have proven lethal for those who were too mentally unwell to seek shelter without intervention.

Communities cannot tolerate the suffering that follows the misguided policies of these activists for long.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

States around the country have made strides in pushing back against the movement to take away essential law enforcement tools from communities while also reprioritizing treatment-oriented services and shelters to support an increasingly complex homeless population.

Now, the Supreme Court has restored the power of communities located in the 9th Circuit to respond appropriately to the public health and safety challenges posed by unchecked homeless encampments. The Supreme Court’s decision will ensure that local authorities have the resources to help the most vulnerable people in their communities get the support they need to survive.

Devon Kurtz is the director of public safety policy at the Cicero Institute, a public policy think tank based in Austin, Texas.