By: Ana Cucalon

Edited by: Alexandria Ragy and Valerie Chu

The impending Supreme Court case regarding homelessness rules in Oregon serves as a poignant reminder of the interconnectedness between homelessness, evictions, and the broader issue of inequality within the American justice system. As the nation grapples with a growing homelessness epidemic and an escalating eviction crisis, it becomes imperative to understand the underlying causes and their legal ramifications. This article seeks to delve into the complex dynamics at play, drawing upon recent scholarship to explore how rising levels of inequality perpetuate the cycle of evictions and homelessness, consequently exacerbating the justice system crisis.

The case before the Supreme Court revolves around the legality of homelessness in American cities, specifically in Oregon where the case is centered. At its core lies the tension between municipal ordinances wishing to regulate the use of public spaces and the constitutional rights of homeless individuals, namely their right to sleep. The case is set to address an issue so contested that it has united Democrat and Republican politicians as they plead to the Supreme Court for clarification as to how the homelessness crisis should be addressed. Specifically, they want two things to be made clear: what constitutes an adequate shelter, and what constitutes involuntary homelessness. [1]

The Oregon case began in Boise, Idaho, where a homeless group sued the city for violating the Eighth Amendment. After being fined for sleeping in a public space, the group argued that because the city did not have adequate shelter beds, they were involuntarily homeless. Therefore, they argued they should not be punished for sleeping in public spaces as it is an “unusual and cruel punishment” to criminalize the need to sleep. [2] They won their case, and when the defendants appealed to the Supreme Court they were denied. The case, titled Martin v. Boise, is the basis for the case in Grants Pass. There, homeless people were increasingly fined for sleeping on sidewalks and in parks, facing incarceration were they to repeat the offense. Many of them were incapable of paying the fines so stayed in the parks. They proceeded to sue the city, stating that they were violating the Constitution based on the legal precedent set in Martin v. Boise. They argued that they were subject to the same involuntary homelessness described in the case, as Grant Pass did not provide adequate shelter for them to reside. [3] The Oregon case raises three important questions plaguing the American justice system: can cities make it illegal to be homeless? Why is there an increase in homelessness? Is there a deeper issue propelling the crisis at hand?

Legal scholars Colleen Shanahan and Anna Carpenter would argue that there is, and the issue is inequality. Their research underscores how structural disparities within the legal system disproportionately disadvantage marginalized groups, leading to a proliferation of evictions. They discuss how due to rising levels of poverty, increases in rent, and disproportionately poor conditions in underprivileged neighborhoods, people are continuously forced out of their homes. [4] Sociologist Matthew Desmond said this downward residential mobility also propels negative effects such as “adolescent violence, poor school performances, and health risks” (Desmond 89). [5] This reveals a systematic cycle of poverty and inequality, which no matter the attempts to address homelessness and the eviction crisis, continue to exacerbate the burdens on the justice system. In their article "Simplified Courts Can’t Solve Inequality," Shanahan and Carpenter argue that these problems of inequality can’t be solved through legislation. Instead, they believe social safety nets are better equipped to address the issues of systemic poverty that propel homelessness and eviction. [6]

Therefore, it is important to question whether or not the Supreme Court can tackle the issue of homelessness. The strain on the justice system caused by eviction demonstrates that the Court may need to be more capable of addressing the issue it is presented with. Overburdened courts and inadequate legal representation for vulnerable populations perpetuate systemic injustices. Recent research underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms to mitigate the adverse effects of inequality within the justice system.

In conclusion, the eviction and homelessness crises plaguing America's justice system are symptomatic of deeper societal inequities. By examining the interplay between rising inequality, evictions, and homelessness, scholars have uncovered systemic flaws that perpetuate cycles of poverty and marginalization. As the Supreme Court prepares to navigate the legal complexities surrounding homelessness regulations, it may be necessary for policymakers, advocates, and communities to prioritize solutions that address the root causes of inequality.

Notes:

Abbie VanSickle, "Supreme Court to Hear Case Over Homelessness Rules in Oregon," New York Times, September 27, 2023.
"The Supreme Court Takes Up Homelessness," The Daily, podcast audio, New York Times, November 3, 2023.
VanSickle, "Supreme Court to Hear Case Over Homelessness Rules in Oregon,"
Shanahan and Carpenter, "Lawyerless Law Development," Journal of Law and Social Inquiry 42, no. 3 (Summer 2017): 567-589.
Matthew Desmond, "Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty" (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2010).
Shanahan and Carpenter, "Simplified Courts Can't Solve Inequality," Stanford Law Review 69, no. 2 (February 2017): 423-445.

Bibliography:

Desmond, Matthew. 2012."Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty." American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 118, No. 1.

Shanahan, and Carpenter. 2023. "Lawyerless Law Development." Stanford Law Review, no. 3: 567-589.

Shanahan, and Carpenter. 2019. "Simplified Courts Can't Solve Inequality." Journal of Law and Social Inquiry, no. 2: 423-445.

The Daily, New York Times. 2024. "The Supreme Court Takes Up Homelessness." https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/podcasts/the-daily/supreme-court-homelessness.html

VanSickle, Abbie. 2024. "Supreme Court to Hear Case Over Homelessness Rules in Oregon." New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/12/us/politics/supreme-court-homeless-camps-oregon.html