Homeless can’t be banned from sleeping on streets if no shelter is available, Supreme Court says

Read the Story

Show Top Comments

This is kind of funny if you think about it. If you’re homeless and then is no shelter available, what the hell are you supposed to do if sleeping outside is made illegal? It’s almost as if we were to make breathing or blinking illegal.


Being poor is not a crime. Allowing people to be poor is. E: if there is one single person living on the street, then no one person should be making tens of millions+. E2: Thanks for the silver! E2.b: Thanks everyone for blowing this up! It’s been good talks and good reading!


The title is miss leading. The Supreme Court declined to actually say anything on this issue. By default, this leaves the lower court’s decision in place. That lower court decision is the ninth circuit court, who said that the homeless can’t be banned from sleeping on the street if no shelter is available. By declining to hear the case, only the ninth circuit states are affected by this ruling. Other circuits may decide that “well if the court declined to hear it then we should follow this precedent” but they don’t have to. The Supreme Court will often only get involved with an issue when different circuit courts make contradicting rulings, called a “circuit split.” They don’t want to wade through every issue, but when the fundamental interpretation of federal laws or the US constitution varies from one circuit to another then they feel obligated to weigh in.


I can’t believe the Roberts Court made a ruling I agree with!


My city removed all benches because one or two homeless people would **sit** on them during the day. Now the homeless people wander around or sit on the floor.