US Cities Can Now Punish Homeless People. Will This Help or Hurt Crisis Management?

“I still have 20 minutes before I have to move,” Anthony shouted from his green tent on a Hollywood sidewalk as he heard footsteps approaching.

Los Angeles officials had come earlier to warn him that he risked arrest if he did not move his belongings.

They told him about the recent Supreme Court opinion that opened the door for cities and states across the United States to punish anyone sleeping outdoors — the most significant decision on homelessness since at least the 1980s, when many experts say America’s modern homelessness crisis began.

This adds to the long list of worries Anthony says he already has.

“I’m just trying to survive,” he told the BBC as he lay in his tent, using a blue backpack as a pillow.

Inside is a black trash bag, filled with whatever it can carry as it moves from area to area.

“Some nights I don’t sleep,” he said. “I’ve been tired all day. I just want to lie down somewhere comfortable and take a good nap. And that’s it. I don’t bother anyone.”

Moments later, Anthony packed up and left in search of a new place to settle down.

The Supreme Court’s decision is already having a ripple effect on cities across the country, which have been encouraged to take tougher measures to eliminate homeless encampments that have sprung up in the wake of the pandemic.

Many American cities are grappling with how to combat this growing crisis. That question has been at the heart of recent election cycles on the West Coast, where elected officials have invested record amounts of money in creating shelters and building affordable housing.

Leaders face increasing pressure as long-term solutions – from housing and shelter to voluntary treatment services and eviction relief – take time.

“It’s not easy and it’s going to take time to put solutions in place that work, so there’s a bit of political theater playing out here,” Scout Katovich, a lawyer who focuses on these issues for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told the BBC.

“Politicians want to be able to say they are doing something”

The problem, Katovich and other homeless advocates say, is that arresting or fining homeless people will only make the problem worse.

“This tactic only postpones the deadline. Sure, you can clean a street, but the people you arrest will definitely come back.”

Last week’s Supreme Court ruling did not specify how cities and governments should deal with homelessness, but it gave communities the ability to take tougher measures without fear of legal recourse.

The case began in the small town of Grants Pass, Oregon, which has a population of about 40,000. Over the past 20 years, the town has doubled in size, but its supply of affordable and social housing has not kept pace. Real estate prices have skyrocketed and the number of homeless people has increased.

Elected officials have passed laws allowing the city to issue $295 (£230) fines – or 20 days in jail for repeat offenders – to homeless people sleeping or camping in public places. Three homeless people sued the city in 2018 after receiving multiple tickets they were unable to pay.

An appeals court found that such laws virtually prohibited homelessness and constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that cities are free to prohibit homeless people from sleeping outdoors in public places.

“A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom that the American people possess in deciding how best to address a pressing social issue like homelessness,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion.

Theane Evangelis argued the case before the Supreme Court on behalf of Grants Pass.

She said municipal authorities have their hands tied because they cannot force people to seek shelter. Those who refuse to use the services offered end up staying in camps, she said.

“Living in tents is not a humanitarian solution and does not treat people with dignity. So the Supreme Court’s decision is remarkable in that it listened to these cities,” she said.

Grants Pass leaders say they plan to review the Supreme Court’s opinion before developing a plan on whether to enforce its ban on encampments.

The decision comes at a critical time for the homeless.

Last year, the United States recorded the highest number of homeless people since 2007, when the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development began collecting such data.

In 2023, 653,104 homeless people were counted in the agency’s annual homelessness assessment. That’s an increase of nearly 11 percent from the previous year.

The ACLU has been tracking the reaction of city leaders to the decision across the United States.

She already sent a letter to Manchester, New Hampshire, after the mayor promised to ban encampments to “make our streets safe, clear and walkable.”

Other city leaders, such as the mayor of Lancaster, California, have vowed to be “much more aggressive” against encampments in neighborhoods and near stores.

Mayor R Rex Parris told the Los Angeles Times: “We’re going to move them very quickly.”

Oregon state lawmakers also appear ready to consider changing laws that would give them greater latitude in clearing homeless camps, local media reported.

But fining people who can’t afford housing makes their financial situation worse, advocates say.

Stopping them could make it harder to find work or housing, experts told the BBC.

“There is reams and reams of evidence that having an unpaid citation and an arrest warrant, let alone incarceration, prevents people from accessing housing and employment in other places,” Chris Herring, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles, told the BBC.

“It actually prevents people from accessing shelter.”

Not all cities welcomed the court’s decision.

In Los Angeles, the mayor called the decision “disappointing” and pledged to continue investing in affordable housing, voluntary treatment and eviction protections.

Days after the notice, the city released a count of homeless people showing the first decline in nearly six years.

Advocates say it’s a great example that other cities can follow.

“Real change takes time,” Sasha Morozov, regional director of PATH, a major homeless relief provider in the Los Angeles area, told the BBC.

Morozov stressed, however, that outreach teams in the Los Angeles area continue to work to inform people living on the streets about the Supreme Court decision. The teams are also preparing for an increased demand for legal services.

Around the corner from Anthony’s, Topher Williams, 28, lives in a makeshift tent on the sidewalk.

Black and blue tarps are tied to tree branches and street parking posts. Plywood boards line the edges of the structure, which he calls a three-room apartment.

Mr Williams, who told the BBC he is an army veteran, has been living on the streets for four years. An unfortunate combination of medical expenses and economic hardships related to the pandemic has left him without a job or a home.

Like Anthony, he is frustrated by the lack of compassion from city officials and law enforcement.

“It’s unbelievable the way people look at us. The way they treat us like we’re just animals. And they have no idea,” he said, tears welling in his eyes.

“I served eight years in the military. I did two tours. I made the ultimate sacrifice fighting for this country, and to be treated like a second-class citizen is insane.”

When asked if he was afraid of possible arrests, he said it was part of his lifestyle.

“We have a lot on our plate already. A lot of it is stressful enough. But I don’t worry about things until they start affecting me.”

Like Topher, Anthony said being arrested might not be the worst situation.

“At least I’ll have a bed and maybe I’ll be in the system and get the right help.”