Posted on 04/21/2021 2:22:59 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The judge is correct regarding his criticisms of the current situation — not so much about the solution. But glad to see his order includes auditing and controls.
Or leave LA. Lots of people want their freedom to roam.
Perhaps, Judge David O. C*****r needs to have campers on his front and back lawn.
See if the shoe fits on the other foot....
Judges making policy, which is not the Constitutional province of judges.
How do you think we wound up with school bussing to destroy urban schools and cities and create white flight?
Speaking of school bussing, in St. Louis, a federal judge ordered the state to pay to transport inner city students to schools out in the county (St Louis City is not a part of the surrounding St Louis County). In order for the inner city kids to enjoy the full suburban educational experience, students rode cabs to their schools so they could stay after and participate in after-school activities. The money spent was basically taken off of the top of the entire state’s educational budget.
Then there was the Federal judge who ordered the state to build what was most likely the most expensive high school in the nation at the time. Full video studio, Olympic-size pool, and a recreated historic ‘cabin’ complete with full-time caretaker. This was to be a magnet school that would draw students from both KS and MO—state lines were to be ignored.
Both court orders were finally vacated. I have no idea of the fate of the KCMO high school, but both KC and StL school systems are among the worst in the state.
Adios
Deprivation of property for starters. People are encouraged by the city to sleep in the doorways of private property leaving a trail of waste of all kinds behind. Spread of infectious disease. And inability to conduct commerce because the city policy has been, essentially, to condemn an entire neighborhood where nobody wants to go.
I don’t know if it is still the policy but at one time the LA City Police literally cordoned off the blocks that are referred to as “Skid Row” and moved by force the homeless people to reside there. I am pretty sure that policy ended but it created precedent. Skid Row is not one street it is basically 11 city blocks wide by 11 city blocks deep. And homeless live not just there, but all in the periphery and spread across the entire city.
Now these may not be the rights or questions asserted by the plaintiff and there may not be any easy solutions. What I do know is that even in the most liberal bastions of the city the residents openly protest the construction of low income housing units in NIMBY style. And the city spends something in the range of $1 million per housing unit e.g. maybe 2-3 people (assuming they can agree to live together) costs them $1 million per to build. Garcetti the mayor wants to spend $1 billion in Covid Relief money but that won’t even put a dent at the rate they spend - and that’s assuming they can find a place to build. There is plenty of cheap land in the county but they won’t build there and the people won’t move there if they did.
He offered up his pension and home to help out...
I am sure the celebrities who own multi room mansions can help.
You know that massive desert/canyon like area you see for a couple of hours while flying coast to coast?
Send them there...with a weekly food drop
Best case it’s within a state’s “general powers”.
But this is a federal judge.
The lawsuit was filed last year by a group of business owners, residents and community leaders called the LA Alliance for Human Rights.I wouldn't trust those liberal Democrat plaintiffs with a brass nickel.
“KC and StL school systems are among the worst in the state.”
KC and St Louis reflect the problem with urban areas with heavy minority population (yes, you can interpret that as poor Black). The problem is culture. Change the culture and you change the educational environment. Change the scenery with a bus and you don’t change the culture. If we and they (yes, you can interpret they as poor Black) don’t address the substantive underlying issue, we just end up spreading the harm.
The Crab-Bucket Mentality, it saps ambition.
Well move some into his house then. In fact issue a court order that every home owner in LA COUNTY to take a homeless person in.. 5
Maybe you are right not to. I have no idea who they are or if they are just an ad hoc group or what their agenda might be.
On the other hand, you might look at it from a different perspective which is that they are sincere. Even if you or I disagree with them on just about everything, on the surface it seems they want accountability and transparency on their issue which is, IMO, quite rare for people on the left. Usually they are quite content to just shuffle money around to various insiders and connected people and claim progress.
Which is why I started on this thread saying at least I can experience the schadenfreude in all this.
Condemn the properties adjacent to this judge’s home and build apartments where these homeless will be placed. When the judge moves, condemn the properties adjacent to his new home and do the same. Rinse and repeat.
A friened of ours took us down to Skid Row in LA back in 2001.
He said they would just hang around the 3:16 Mission for breakfast, hang around for lunch, hang around for supper, then find a place to sleep.
None showed any interest in working even though many were able bodied men.
One old man was arguing with someone only he could see on an empty park bench. The bench was empty to us.
Time to reopen the mental hospitals closed in the 1970s.
Starting page 67 Constitutional Grounds. Looks like the judge is stating that 1) the situation arose due to racism, and courts have a history of addressing problems arising from racism, 2) That the state has made the situation worse through their actions and when the state creates a danger, then the courts can remedy it, 3) the state has basically incarcerated the homeless on skid row when makes them the responsibility of the state, etc.
Then he goes into state law...
The California Welfare and Institutions Code provides as follows:
Every county and every city and county shall relieve and support all incompetent, poor, indigent persons, and those incapacitated by age, disease, or accident, lawfully resident therein, when such persons are not supported and relieved by their relatives or friends, by their own means, or by state hospitals or other state or private institutions.
I'm not a lawyer, though I play one on FR. But it looks like the judge dotted his i's and crossed his t's.
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.