"...by magically funding and requiring cities to house the homeless because the only way to actually solve homelessness is to provide them homes." That's what they did, right? Right‽
"...by magically funding and requiring cities to house the homeless because the only way to actually solve homelessness is to provide them homes."
Worse, in many of these cities there were lawyers willing to fight on behalf of the unhoused. This ruling eliminates that option and gives cities a lot more free reign to throw these folks in jail...
It means cities have the same (bad) options that they had before the courts got involved.
Worse, in many of these cities there were lawyers willing to fight on behalf of the unhoused. This ruling eliminates that option and gives cities a lot more free reign to throw these folks in jail or deal with them in a lot more ways.
I'm going by a brief skim of the article, but it sounds like they ruled against lawsuits on Eighth Amendment grounds. Are there other avenues that lawyers could use?
I'm going by a brief skim of the article, but it sounds like they ruled against lawsuits on Eighth Amendment grounds. Are there other avenues that lawyers could use?
Not only is the option where lawyers would defend the homeless now gutted, but things like this empower localities/legislatures to proactively further criminalize homelessness. Very true, this...
Not only is the option where lawyers would defend the homeless now gutted, but things like this empower localities/legislatures to proactively further criminalize homelessness.
Very true, this indeed solves nothing, but it doesn't stop there. It will make things even worse.
"...by magically funding and requiring cities to house the homeless because the only way to actually solve homelessness is to provide them homes."
That's what they did, right?
Right‽
Seems like it doesn't solve anything. It means cities have the same (bad) options that they had before the courts got involved.
Worse, in many of these cities there were lawyers willing to fight on behalf of the unhoused. This ruling eliminates that option and gives cities a lot more free reign to throw these folks in jail or deal with them in a lot more ways.
I'm going by a brief skim of the article, but it sounds like they ruled against lawsuits on Eighth Amendment grounds. Are there other avenues that lawyers could use?
Not only is the option where lawyers would defend the homeless now gutted, but things like this empower localities/legislatures to proactively further criminalize homelessness.
Very true, this indeed solves nothing, but it doesn't stop there. It will make things even worse.
I guess that depends on what the status quo was and how it changes. I'm not very familiar with what laws there were before.