Experts working to end homelessness in Minnesota say Supreme Court ruling on Grants Pass v. Johnson will make their jobs harder

Organizations working to end homelessness in Minnesota warn that a U.S. Supreme Court ruling will make it harder to move people living on the streets into permanent housing.

The high court ruled Friday that fining or jailing people for breaking anti-camping ordinances when there is no shelter available does not violate the Constitution. The decision gives local governments across the country the green light to cite and possibly arrest people in homeless encampments or other public spaces.

“We know that this population in particular, with higher rates of significant mental health conditions, higher rates of substance use disorders, are facing a lot of barriers already,” said Stephanie Nelson-Dusek, a research scientist behind the Wilder Foundation’s triennial Minnesota Homeless Study. “Piling on more barriers is not a solution to ending homelessness.”

The Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s ruling on City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which the National Homelessness Law Center called the most significant case on homelessness to be reviewed by the Supreme Court in 40 years. When advocates for the poor in Grants Pass, Ore., accused the city of using anti-camping laws to effectively banish its homeless population to other communities, Grants Pass petitioned the Supreme Court to defend its ability to close encampments and issue citations of nearly $300 that could escalate to larger fines of $1,250, a month in jail and a ban from city property if not paid on time.

“From 30 years of research, we know that people who are sleeping outside … have some of the most complex health needs of our homeless population, which can really limit the ability to get housing, especially in a competitive rental market,” Nelson-Dusek said. “The decision glosses over the bigger picture, which is that we do not have enough safe and stable housing. We don’t have enough shelter beds, or at least beds that are needed at the moment they’re needed, in areas throughout our state.”

Last October the study found that one-third of homeless adults in Minnesota had been turned away from a shelter in the previous three months, with two-thirds sleeping in a car, vacant building or on public transit as a result. Nearly half of homeless adults were on a waiting list for public housing, and another 10% couldn’t get on the waiting list because it was closed to new applicants.

The state of Minnesota filed a brief opposing the city of Grants Pass, asking the court to uphold homeless people’s right to sleep in public in lieu of shelter. Attorney General Keith Ellison’s office argued that was a “narrow” protection given that local governments would still be able to limit the size and location of encampments, and punish associated criminal conduct such as littering, public drug use and defecation.

“There is overwhelming evidence, meanwhile, that criminalizing involuntary homelessness makes already difficult situations even worse,” the Attorney General’s brief said. “People who have been incarcerated are ten times more likely to be homeless than the general population. This statistic is unsurprising, given the many barriers between people with criminal records and the resources they need to obtain housing and employment. In addition, efforts to clear encampments often destroy the identification papers, cellphones, laptops, and other items that people would use to find employment or housing.”

The city of Grants Pass argued that it was practically barred from enforcing anti-camping laws against anyone because police officers couldn’t tell who wanted shelter but couldn’t get it, who refused shelter because it was not “adequate,” and what adequate shelter meant. Grants Pass has one shelter based in a Christian church that requires homeless people attend daily religious services in return for a place to sleep.

“Given the difficulties of administering a shelter-based approach, district courts applying [prior court rulings] have hamstrung cities in enforcing public-camping laws against anyone unless and until they have enough ‘secular shelter space’ for everyone — a near-impossible task, especially because the number of homeless people surpasses the shelter available in every major western city and continues to climb,” the city wrote in its petition.

In a 6-3 ruling Friday, the Supreme Court sided with the Oregon city, overturning a 2018 decision out of Idaho that limited western cities’ ability to sweep camps in lieu of providing adequate shelter. Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch said that fines and jail time were not “cruel and unusual” methods of punishment, regardless of the conduct being punished. For the minority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the court had abdicated its role to safeguard the most vulnerable Americans.

Hennepin County is working with a national organization, Community Solutions, to achieve functional zero chronic homelessness — the state in which more people are helped into housing than losing it — by 2025. The goal is complicated by cities’ need to close encampments when they become too large and problematic for neighborhoods and demand for shelter beds outpacing supply.

Regardless of the many practical difficulties, fining and arresting people for trespassing on public land makes those challenges worse, Communities Solutions’ Chief Program Officer Beth Sandor said.

“There’s nowhere in America where arresting and fining people for sleeping on the street has led to reductions in unsheltered homelessness or an overall homelessness,” Sandor said. “Fees and fines make it harder for people to access employment, housing and social services … And so we hope the focus will really be on solutions rather than expensive ways to not solve homelessness.”