Written by Cove Johnson Rabidoux
It is the middle of the night and you are cold and struggling to find a safe place to rest. The streets, once bustling with activity, now are dark and quiet. That is the harsh reality for many individuals who don’t have access to housing. However, now these individuals will not just have to face the daily struggle for survival, but also the looming threat of criminalization.
On Monday, April 22nd, In Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, the United States Supreme Court discussed whether making it illegal to sleep outdoors in public spaces violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment serves as a cornerstone of constitutional law, protecting individuals from excessive or disproportionate punishment by the state.
This sparked a mixed reaction among Supreme Court justices, but the majority felt uneasy about “constitutionalizing” local homelessness policies. What lies at the heart of this case are ordinances from Grants Pass, a modest town in Oregon. Grants Pass enforces a $295 fine for those found sleeping on public properties. This fine may even escalate if there are repeated infractions, which can eventually culminate in criminal charges, such as a $1,250 fine and an incarceration of 30 days. While deliberating, the Supreme Court justices went back and forth grappling with the tension between those who are experiencing homelessness and the government's interest in criminalizing homelessness to maintain public order.
The case of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson highlights the complex questions that surround the criminalization of homelessness. While some argue that such measures are necessary to maintain public order and safety, others declare that they violate fundamental human rights.
Those who are against the criminalization articulate that criminalizing homelessness fails to address the underlying issues that cause one to be homeless. Poverty, lack of affordable housing, mental illness, and substance abuse/addiction are all known to be the leading contributors of homelessness. Therefore, many believe that these complex problems require actual solutions rather than punitive measures, such as criminalization. Plus, the criminalization of homelessness would likely perpetuate a cycle of poverty and marginalization, exacerbating rather than alleviating the problem. When people are penalized for sleeping in public spaces, it is even more difficult for them to access the resources they need.
On the other hand, those who advocate for the criminalization of homelessness argue that allowing individuals to sleep in public spaces poses safety hazards, both for those who are homeless and for the general public.
As a result, the criminalization of homelessness is not only a legal and constitutional issue but also a moral one. It reflects the current values and priorities of our society, as well as demands a collective response. Ultimately, by focusing solely on enforcement, we do not confront the root causes of homelessness and provide support and resources to those who need it. That is why we need to address the underlying causes of homelessness and provide meaningful support and assistance so that we can ensure everyone has access to housing.
Comments