Homeless Encampment Ordinances in the Wake of Martin v. City of Boise: Legality and Enforcement

Description

Historically, cities have banned homeless encampments along public sidewalks by enforcing "anti-camping" and other "quality of life" laws with fines, citations, or even arrest. The Ninth Circuit, in Martin v. City of Boise, prohibited cities, on constitutional grounds, from enforcing such ordinances unless it offers shelter for all homeless in its jurisdiction.

The decision has been roundly criticized for distorting the Eighth Amendment and for creating a constitutional standard impossible to meet. Many assert that it cripples the ability of cities to maintain basic public health standards and sets the stage for rampant disease, increased criminal activity, and massive costs related to clean up. Advocates for the homeless applaud the Martin decision as the "hammer" to force cities and other governmental entities to find meaningful and long-term solutions to homelessness.

Technically only binding in the Ninth Circuit, courts in Colorado and Virginia have cited the opinion. Suits based on its holding have been filed outside the Ninth Circuit. Its supporters are eager to convert the rest of the country.

Listen as our panel discusses the Martin decision, its impact on cities in the Ninth Circuit, how cities and towns are coping, and what other municipalities should be thinking and doing.