The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case from Grants Pass, Oregon, that could have significant implications for how California officials handle homeless encampments. The case questions whether cities can legally ban or restrict unhoused individuals from camping in public spaces. The ruling, expected later this year, could potentially grant California officials more power to address the issue of homelessness.

The case revolves around the precedent set by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the 2018 Martin v. Boise ruling. This ruling stated that it is cruel and unusual punishment to criminalize camping on public property when individuals have no other legal place to sleep. The decision had binding effects on West Coast cities, where rising rates of unsheltered homelessness necessitated local politicians to pass public camping restrictions.

Since the Martin v. Boise ruling, California cities have faced federal lawsuits after implementing camping bans. Judges, citing the precedent, have either delayed or halted the enforcement of these bans in cities such as San Francisco, Sacramento, Chico, and San Rafael. The courts have argued that these cities failed to provide adequate alternative shelter options for the homeless individuals they were displacing.

City officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, have expressed frustration with the Martin v. Boise ruling, claiming that it hinders their ability to address the growing homeless encampments in the state. They argue that sweeping these camps is necessary for public health and safety, as well as the well-being of the individuals living in these encampments. Both liberal and conservative officials in California have joined together in requesting the Supreme Court to grant more power to penalize unhoused individuals for sleeping outside.

The case has garnered significant attention, with numerous entities filing amicus curiae briefs to support their stance. Among them are the California State Association of Counties, the California State Sheriffs' Association, city officials from Los Angeles and San Francisco, and organizations such as the Bay Area Council and the Brentwood Community Council. Governor Newsom was the only governor to submit his own brief.

However, advocates for the unhoused argue that the Martin v. Boise ruling is clear and that banning or restricting public camping only exacerbates the issue. They contend that most cities lack sufficient shelter beds to accommodate their homeless populations, and forcing individuals to move from place to place does more harm than good.

The Supreme Court's decision in this case will be closely watched across California and could significantly impact how cities respond to homeless encampments. It remains to be seen whether the court will uphold or overturn the Martin v. Boise precedent. While city officials hope for more leeway in setting restrictions on camping, legal experts anticipate that the Supreme Court may simply overturn the 2018 ruling and allow cities to broadly criminalize encampments.

Critics argue that this would prioritize punishment over providing essential services, perpetuating a cycle of homelessness that fails to address the root causes of the issue. The Supreme Court's ruling is expected to bring clarity to the legal landscape surrounding homeless encampments and the powers of California officials in addressing this pressing crisis.

For more news and updates on inequality in California, sign up for Inequality Insights, a weekly newsletter focusing on one of the state's most pressing issues.