Posted on 12/16/2019 7:32:26 AM PST by BenLurkin
The outcome is a significant victory for homeless activists and a setback for city officials in California and other western states who argued the appeals court ruling undercut their authority to regulate encampments on the sidewalks.
Lawyers for the homeless had argued it was cruel and wrong to punish people who have nowhere else to sleep at night. They won a major victory last year when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prosecuting people for sleeping on the sidewalks violated the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
(Excerpt) Read more at ktla.com ...
This decision says the bums have consideration ubber alles.
Really? Next they’ll hold defecation on the streets is also a protected right. Geez.
I think cities should allow homeless camps outside the judges homes.
Let em dump in a courtroom...
The only thing you can do is move WAY out of urban areas.
Judges need to take the homeless into their homes—every single judge who votes for such a decision.
We need to end this age of hypocrisy and virtue signaling.
That was last year’s ruling
Letting a ruling stand does not mean SCOTUS agrees with it. It simply means they felt it was a matter for the court that made the final ruling. Not every issue rises to a level requiring SCOTUS review or ruling.
The Supremes are close to attaining the “respect” that has now descended upon the FBI.
How many other countries have leaders that are SICK ENOUGH to permit this shit to happen, and then protect it through their courts?
... and use it as their personal bathroom.
“The only thing you can do is move WAY out of urban areas.”
With the Soros mob now in District Attorney positions, along with judgeships for big cities and their surrounding areas, I’ve told my kids to ONLY live in Red counties...otherwise, they’ll simply be prosecuted for their skin color (and they ain’t black, either).
Question: how many of these “homeless activists” have brought any homeless into their own homes?
This is when the City makes it LEGAL to CAMP on ANY sidewalk within 500 feet of the Personal Residence of ALL Officers of the Court!
I think a better thing would be for all taxpayers who live where the homeless sleep have to be allowed to sleep on the sidewalks refuse to pay any property tax. A portion of the property tax is supposed to be for public sidewalks for use by residents. Making them impassable cancels that out. If the sidewalks are paid for with special assessments those should also be withheld.
PS. I doubt the 9th circuit ruled for just how long a person had to be left sleeping. Five minute cat nap should be enough.
Good. Let the effects of liberalism be present in areas that vote for it.
It would appear that SCOTUS is not say I g that cities are barred from addressing problematic homelessness. They just can’t prosecute.
So they can still tell the homeless to leave, and bring in crews to remove the rubbish.
Lawyers for the homeless had argued it was cruel and wrong to punish people who have nowhere else to sleep at night. They won a major victory last year when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prosecuting people for sleeping on the sidewalks violated the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
...
I think people should note that prosecuting people for sleeping on the sidewalks when there is nowhere else to go is different than removing them from the sidewalks and telling them to go somewhere else, or to prosecute them when there is a shelter available, but they insist on sleeping on the sidewalks.
They do now,unless they live in gated communities. (Private property)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.