The Supreme Court has ruled that cities can fine people for sleeping in public places

Updated June 28, 2024 at 11:15 AM ET

In its biggest decision on homelessness in decades, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that cities can ban people from sleeping or camping in public spaces. In a 6-3 decision driven by ideological grounds, the justices overturned lower courts that had found it cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment for people to sleep outside when they have nowhere else to go.

Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch stated: “Homelessness is complex. There are many reasons.” But he said federal judges have no “special authority” to decide how cities should handle it.

“The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges to wrest those rights and responsibilities from the American people and in their place dictate this nation’s homelessness policy,” he wrote.

In dissent, Justice Sotomayor said the decision focused solely on the needs of cities, but not the needs of the most vulnerable. She said sleep is a biological necessity, but the decision leaves homeless people with an “impossible choice—either not to sleep or to be arrested.”

The court’s decision is a victory not only for the small town of Grants Pass, Oregon, which brought the case, but also for dozens of Western towns that have pushed for the high court to give them greater enforcement powers as they grapple with record-high rates of homelessness. They said lower court rulings limited their ability to keep public spaces open and safe for everyone.

But homeless advocates say the decision will do nothing to solve the larger problem and could make life much more difficult for the quarter of a million people living on the streets, in parks and in cars. “Where will people experiencing homelessness go if every community decides to punish them for being homeless?” says Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Today’s ruling merely changes the law in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers California and eight other Western states that are home to the majority of America’s homeless population. But it will also determine whether similar policies elsewhere are permissible; and it will almost certainly affect homelessness policies in cities across the country.

Cities complain they are struggling to manage the public safety crisis

Grants Pass and other cities have argued that lower court rulings have fueled the spread of homeless camps, threatening public health and safety. While those rulings have allowed cities to restrict when and where people can sleep, or even close encampments, they have said cities must first provide people with adequate shelter.

That’s a challenge in many places where there aren’t enough shelter beds. In filings with local governments, cities also expressed frustration that many unhoused people refuse shelter when it’s available; they may be reluctant to go if the facility, for example, prohibits pets or drugs and alcohol.

Critics also said lower court rulings were ambiguous, making them unworkable in practice. Localities have faced dozens of lawsuits over the details of what is allowed. And they argued that homelessness is a complex issue that requires balancing competing interests, something local officials are better equipped to handle than the courts.

“We’re trying to show that there’s a respect for public places that we all should have,” Seattle attorney Ann Davison told NPR earlier this year. She’s written a legal brief on behalf of a dozen other cities. “We care about people, we’re engaged, and we’re committed to finding a long-term solution for them.”

This decision will not solve the larger problem of growing homelessness

Advocates for homeless people in Grants Pass have argued that the city’s regulations are so extreme that they effectively make it illegal for people without a home to exist. To discourage sleeping in public places, the city banned the use of stoves and sleeping bags, pillows or other bedding. However, Grants Pass has no public shelter, only a Christian mission, which imposes various restrictions and requires people to attend religious services.

“That’s kind of the bare minimum that a just society should expect, which is that you’re not going to punish someone for something that they have no control over,” said Ed Johnson of the Oregon Law Center, which represents people suing the city.

He also added that burdening people with fines and criminal records makes it even more difficult for them to find housing.