STAY AWAKE OR BE ARRESTED!

In June the Supreme Court ruled, in spite of the Eighth Amendment, protecting us from excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment, it is acceptable to arrest, fine, and remove fellow citizens who can’t afford homes. Without offering alternatives Judge Gorsuch wrote “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many,” but he said federal judges lack any “special competence” to inform cities how to manage it. He brazenly recommended that since sleeping in public is now a criminal act, the accused should pursue the “necessity defense” when apprehended. (A necessity defense is an admission of guilt with claims that the act was necessary. Not all states recognize the necessity defense, but even when it is permitted it is seldom successful.)

In Grants Pass, Oregon, a town with no homeless shelter, the penalty for sleeping in a public park is $295. That’s a bar-gain compared to a law signed by Governor Abbott; he allows fines up to $500 and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has warned that failure to enforce this will result in “costly litigation and a loss of state grant funds.” Spiraling rent costs, a dearth of affordable housing, and the end of federal pandemic funds caused homelessness to soar 12 per cent last year nationally. Th e elderly, young LGBTQ community members, and Blacks are the most exposed.
“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dis-sent. “Punishing people for something they can’t control, like homelessness, is cruel and unusual.”
Her sympathy is bolstered by her experience of growing up in public housing. She expressed exasperation with her conservative colleagues. “Instead, the majority [justices] focuses almost exclusively on the needs of local governments and leaves the most vulnerable in our society with an impossible choice: Either stay awake or be arrested.”

This ruling applies to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, California and a handful of other Western states, not Houston, but it does off er permission for our city to contemplate different processes. Mayor Turner’s Office on Homelessness had a better idea. Instead of oppressing the victims, they invested in long-term housing and service plans that decreased the city’s unhoused population by more than 60 per cent in a decade. Case managers made accommodations avail-able to each client, including shelter, literacy, food, physical and mental health. But first, housing. “Once we house somebody, the last thing we want them to do is recidivate back onto the streets. We will never house somebody without services. Th e services is what keeps the person housed. And the housing is what makes the services effective,” explained Mark Eichenbaum in January when he was Mayor Turner’s special assistant on homeless initiatives.
“What do you call somebody experiencing homelessness, who’s in the shelter? They’re still homeless.”

Not to be outdone, Houston Mayor John Whitmire has announced “My administration has developed a sensible home-less plan that I’ll release soon … We can do better and will study the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to under-stand what additional effective measures it allows.”