Oregon reactions continue to pour in following U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Grants Pass homelessness case

Oregonians continued to speak out after the Friday, June 28, news that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a homelessness ordinance in Grants Pass, Oregon, saying the city’s prohibition on outdoor camping does not violate the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The ruling could pave the way for stricter rules on homelessness in every Oregon community, and the ripple effect could reach across state lines.

Those opposed to the high court’s decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson include Northwest Housing Alternatives, an affordable housing nonprofit in the Pacific Northwest.

“Northwest Housing Alternatives is deeply troubled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of targeting and systemically punishing people experiencing homelessness,” said Kelsey Heilman, the nonprofit board’s vice chair, and Trell Anderson, executive director, in a written release. “Everyone deserves a safe place to sleep at night. We know in our collective conscience that there are not enough shelters or affordable housing options in our region — and across the country. If any one of us had a family member experience homelessness, we would want them to be treated with dignity and support, not taken to jail.”

Heilman and Anderson said the court’s ruling “just made it more treacherous than ever before to be an unhoused member of our country. This ruling will needlessly criminalize and dehumanize women, seniors, veterans, the LGBTQIA+ community and people of color who experience homelessness at disproportionate rates. Children could be separated from their parents for just being a homeless family.”

Another nonprofit is taking the same tack. “Oregon Food Bank is deeply saddened by the City of Grants Pass v. Johnson ruling, which punishes our neighbors for simply trying to survive,” said Loren Naldoza, public policy advocate. “Criminalization will harm people — especially BIPOC communities and people experiencing poverty — and will make our homelessness crisis more difficult and expensive to solve. Housing insecurity isn’t just a housing issue — it’s a key driver of hunger,” Naldoza said, referencing Black, Indigenous and people of color.

Naldoza also quoted from Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s descent in the case: “Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. For some people, sleeping outside is their only option.”

One state agency tasked with addressing homelessness and the lack of housing stock is Oregon Housing and Community Services.

“For many, we knew this day was coming, and yet it is still devastating. This is a wake-up call for all of us — cities in particular,” said Andrea Bell, executive director. “We cannot succumb to cynicism or confuse this ruling as a mandate. Many of us have either experienced the struggle to make ends meet or know someone who has. In the face of this shared reality, out-of-sight, out-of-mind positions that criminalize sleeping or sheltering in public spaces only exacerbates the experiences of homelessness.”

Bell said the agency’s position remains unchanged. “We reject homelessness as an inevitable outcome,” she said. “Every person, regardless of their background or where they come from, deserves a place to call home.”

But Senate Republicans in the Oregon Legislature praised the high court’s ruling. “This decision recognizes the critical need for local governments to manage public spaces effectively, ensuring safety and order for all citizens,” the caucus stated in a written release. “The Court’s ruling supports the city of Grants Pass’s right to enforce ordinances that prevent public spaces from becoming unsafe and unsanitary. By upholding these regulations, the court has validated the efforts of municipalities to protect their communities while safety and dignity of people experiencing homelessness.”

Across the Columbia River in Vancouver, Washington, the city released a written statement saying the court was correct in putting the onus on municipalities, not courts: “The Supreme Court recognized that addressing homelessness is complex and best left — not to judges — but to the people and their elected representatives to regulate. This underscores the importance of continued thoughtful discussion on regulating the livability impacts of unsheltered homelessness in our community.”

Oregonians’ statements regarding the high court ruling came last week from the chair of the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners; chairs of the Oregon House and Senate housing committees; House Republicans; and Sisters of the Road, a Portland-based group that has long advocated for homeless people.