Liberals in Atlanta are pleased that on Dec. 16 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to overturn a previous ruling of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that city laws criminalizing homeless people are a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The case is City of Boise, Idaho v. Robert Martin et al. and the end result could affect laws within the Atlanta city limits.
The U.S. District Court found that statutes criminalizing activities intrinsic to survival as a human being, in jurisdictions that fail to provide adequate housing opportunities that meet the needs of the specific jurisdiction, can be deemed cruel and unusual punishment.
In this case, such laws target people who are homeless due to being homeless. Boise had a law criminalizing anyone sleeping in public, which it labeled disorderly conduct. And court watchers say Boise’s law is similar to Atlanta’s law in that Atlanta bans urban camping, in Code of Ordinances, Part II, Chapter 106, Sec. 106-12.
Bottom line: The U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling in Bell v. Boise. And the nation’s highest court left the lower court ruling intact. The left-wing Atlanta Progressive News thinks this is a good sign, writing:
“While the Supreme Court’s declining to hear the case is not as meaningful as if the Supreme Court had made the decision affirming the unconstitutionality itself, the ruling is a big deal.
“The Ninth Circuit tends to produce opinions that are generally more progressive on social and economic issues, than the Eleventh Circuit which includes Georgia.
“There is no Eleventh Circuit decision on point; however, the Supreme Court’s action in declining to re-hear Bell v. Boise suggests that it would have been upheld if the Court had in fact heard the case.”
This means that the battle lines have formed between those letting the homeless basically do anything they please on public property versus jurisdictions that want to discourage everything from sleeping on public benches and sidewalks to loitering and public urination.
