did you read the entire article carefully?
a few quotes from it...
"claims police and sanitation workers violated the rights of the city's homeless in the last three years by defining their property as trash and bulldozing their encampments"
"They cannot be denied their constitutional rights because ... they are squatters, ..."
It doesn't really sound like this is restrained to merely their personal possessions, it appears to also refer to the stolen land that those possessions are stored upon. Thes homeless are squatting, or stealing land, period.
That's why I suggest they set up camp, or, merely store their possessions on the good judges' property, I'm sure he would be glad to help them all out.
There isn't one of us who has a guarantee that he will never find himself in these peoples' situation some day.
The mercy, or lack of it, that is shown to them now, may be what we ourselves will get.
That certainly sounds equitable.