About 100 cities have banned people from sleeping outside since June when the Supreme Court ruled that a city in Oregon was allowed to criminalize homelessness despite a lack of public shelters. The policy has support from politicians across the country, Democrats and Republicans alike.
As housing becomes more expensive and harder to find, the U.S. is seeing record highs in homelessness rates. On one night in January of last year, 650,000 people were homeless — an all-time record, according to the National Alliance to End Homelessness.
In California’s San Joaquin County, Supervisor Tom Patti led an effort to increase restrictions on homelessness. Under the new ordinance, people are not allowed to sleep in cars, nor are they allowed to be in one place for more than an hour. They have to move at least 300 feet every time, meaning they theoretically have to walk 1.3 miles a day.
“Letting them stay in place is cruel. We want to prompt them to come to a better place,” Patti, a Republican, told NPR.
People now face a fine of up to $1,000 and six months in jail.
“We’re not hardcore,” he said. “But we do know that if a person’s trying to build a pallet palace with their blue tarps and tents, we say, ‘No, no, no, you’re not allowed to do this, you are trespassing.’”
Patti has suggested an approach focused on reuniting homeless people with family or friends, something that could be detrimental to those fleeing abusive situations.
“We’ve now shifted to a ‘Hello? Where are you from? Where is your support network? Let’s help get you back to home,’” he said.
In November, the National Homelessness Law Center identified 99 ordinances passed in 26 states that limit sleeping and camping outside, with another 66 still pending.
“It’s time for our elected officials to recognize that half of this country struggles to pay rent, and we need to address the affordable housing crisis,” said Jesse Rabinowitz, a spokesperson for the National Homelessness Law Center. “That is the only way we’re going to see fewer people sleeping outside.”
“Every bill is a little bit different,” Rabinowitz recently told the Nevada Current. “The main two things they all have in common are that none of them solve homelessness and all of them will make homelessness worse.”
In the case of City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, a group suing the city argued that criminalizing sleeping outside violated the Constitution’s protection against “cruel and unusual punishment,” but the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority disagreed.
“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent.
“If the Supreme Court were to allow for such a punitive regime, then we’re going to have a race to the bottom to make it as uncomfortable as possible for people to survive,” John Do, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union in Northern California, told Rolling Stone in March.
“Jurisdictions would try to outdo each other in terms of having more costly, more punitive, and more effective measures,” he added.
Some cities are exploring solutions. The Denver Basic Income Project, a nonprofit in Colorado, gave more than 800 homeless study participants up to $12,000 over a year with no conditions. The study found a “remarkable” increase in housing. They also found a reduction in public spending and the use of public services.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston cut funding for the program in October, though, saying that the data did not show big enough changes. Now the program’s future is in jeopardy.
Across the country, though, politicians are cracking down on the homeless.
In September, the city of Fall River, Massachusetts, banned “unauthorized camping on public property,” creating the possibility of fines in certain situations. The ban prohibits sleeping or camping under bridges, in parks, or on sidewalks. It also allows law enforcement to destroy a homeless person’s belongings,
Cities often seize or destroy paperwork people need for housing or employment.
“These individuals are sick and suffering,” said Christopher Conlan, who had been homeless on and off for years, said in response to the ordinance. “They could have drug addiction or mental health issues. I would not have the same contempt for somebody who had cancer or heart disease.”
He added: “Everybody is somebody’s somebody.”