Oregon city asks Supreme Court to decide if ticketing homeless people is constitutional

An Oregon city has asked the Supreme Court to determine whether ticketing homeless people for sleeping on public property is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution.

On Tuesday, the southern Oregon city of Grants Pass told the Supreme Court that a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision to prohibit the city from enforcing its public camping ordinance “cemented a conflict” with California courts that have upheld similar ordinances. 

The consequences of the city being unable to implement a “comprehensive response to the growth” affect those living in and near them and include crime, fires, environmental harm, “the reemergence of medieval diseases,” and drug overdoses and deaths, the city wrote to the high court.

“Time is of the essence for this exceptionally important question,” attorneys for the city wrote.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled in 2018 that cities could not arrest or cite people for sleeping in public when there is no shelter available. People could not be cited if they are using blankets, pillows or other methods of protecting themselves.

The Supreme Court declined to consider a similar appeals case to the lower court’s ruling in 2019. This upheld the lower court’s ruling that punishing people for sleeping outdoors was unconstitutional.

“That is, as long as there is no option of sleeping indoors,” the judges on the panel wrote, “the government cannot criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public property, on the false premise they had a choice in the matter.”

At the center of the case is the Eighth Amendment, which states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Some fines were reported to be up to hundreds of dollars for those living on the streets, according to the 9th Circuit, meaning that many of them would not be able to afford it.