Cal Cities urges SCOTUS to review ruling on anti-camping ordinances

The League of California Cities and others last week filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review a lower court’s ruling on an Oregon city’s encampment policy. The brief highlights the unworkability of the ruling and provides examples of how local governments in California are creatively and proactively using many tools (including anti-camping ordinances) to protect the health and welfare of their entire communities (including unhoused residents).

Case background

Grants Pass, Oregon, enacted an ordinance several years ago that prohibited sleeping or camping on public property. In 2018, it amended the ordinance in response to a pivotal legal ruling, Martin v. City of Boise.

In Martin v. City of Boise, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held that enforcing an anti-sleeping ordinance when there is a greater number of homeless people in a jurisdiction than available shelter spaces violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

The city’s 2018 amendments removed the prohibition on sleeping, but the ordinance continued to prohibit camping. A homeless individual in Grants Pass brought a class action lawsuit (Johnson v. City of Grants Pass) challenging the ordinance on behalf of “all involuntarily homeless persons” in Grants Pass.

The city tried to get the lawsuit thrown out, but the district court was not persuaded. It found that there were more homeless people than shelter beds in Grants Pass. Therefore, the plaintiffs had a valid class action claim for violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Grants Pass appealed and the 9th Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling. The court even went a bit further than it had gone in Martin v. City of Boise. It held that a person’s right to sleep outdoors includes sleeping with rudimentary forms of protection from the elements, such as blankets and shelter. Grants Pass and several local governments unsuccessfully tried to persuade the 9th Circuit to rehear the case.

As a last resort, Grants Pass filed a petition in late August asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the ruling and address the following question: “Does the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property constitute ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ prohibited by the Eighth Amendment?”

Next steps

The petition has drawn support from many local governments and local government associations with impacted members. State governments are supporting the petition too, including Gov. Gavin Newsom. The Supreme Court’s docket contains a full list with links to the numerous amicus briefs filed.

Cal Cities will continue to monitor this case and will report further when the Supreme Court rules on the petition. In the meantime, cities with questions about the impact of the cases should consult with their city attorney.