Residents Call on Council to Oppose Grants Pass Decision

Ahead of Monday’s meeting, several residents opposed a controversial Supreme Court decision that gives local municipalities more power to deal with homeless encampments.

On Monday, the City Council is scheduled to receive information on the Grants Pass decision.

The controversial decision has lifted previous restrictions that prohibited municipalities from certain enforcement measures aimed at curtailing public encampments. 

Advocates argue the ruling provides necessary tools to maintain civic order and safeguard commercial and residential areas, while critics contend it criminalizes homelessness and could exacerbate social inequities.

Nearby cities, including Arcadia, have already started cleaning up encampments.

“This is a crucial moment for the City of Pasadena,” said Jenna Cobb. “The September 9th, 2024 meeting is critical in determining how our city will treat its most vulnerable residents.”

The issue has been discussed, albeit briefly, at several meetings.

Volunteers counted 556 people living on the streets during the last homeless count.

“Sweeping encampments and fining and arresting people for being unhoused exacerbate the problem,” said Anthony Manousos. “Persons experiencing homelessness have reported losing life-saving items due to encampment sweeps, such as medication, blankets, warm clothing, as well as ID cards and other important documents.”

The issue began after the Oregon city passed ordinances that prohibited ‘camping’ on public property, broadly defined to include using materials for bedding to maintain a temporary place to live.

Violations could result in fines of up to $295 per offense, and potential jail time for multiple offenses.

In 2018, Gloria Johnson, John Logan and Debra Blake challenged the constitutionality of the ordinance, and a federal District court ruled in their favor barring the city from enforcing the ordinances at certain times and under specific circumstances.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the District court’s decision in 2022. 

However, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed this ruling in June and held that the enforcement of laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.

“Homelessness is complex,” said Justice Gorsuch in the court’s opinion. “Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it. At bottom, the question this case presents is whether the Eighth Amendment grants federal judges primary responsibility for assessing those causes and devising those responses. It does not.”

But the minority criticized the law and the impact they believe it would have on people.

“Laws like the one at issue here punish people who don’t have access to shelter, amounting to cruel and unusual punishment,” wrote Justice Sotomayor. Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined her dissent.

“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” Sotomayor wrote. “For some people, sleeping outside is their only option.”