Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the case of Grants Pass v Johnson, what’s next? This post is the final one in a four-part series about post-decision developments. It is about the criminalisation of homelessness as a health issue.
The authors, Siya Hegde and Carlton Martin, are both lawyers with extensive experience in housing and landlord tenant law. They argue that the lower court rulings, which upheld the right to sleep outdoors, presented an opportunity for governments to ramp up community treatment and housing programs. Rather than taking up the invitation, governments have appealed judgements, destroyed encampments, issued fines and tickets and passed legislation to enforce mandatory treatment for people who are homeless.
Hegde and Martin review three groups of cases that deal with safeguarding the rights of people experiencing homelessness:
-
- Cruel and unusual punishment: Martin v. Boise and Johnson v. City of Grant’s Pass
- The equal protection provisions in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Griffin v. Illinois
- The criminalization of mental illness and homelessness: Lessard v Schmidt, and O’Connor v. Donaldson
This review is very helpful in understanding the limits of the U.S. Constitution’s promises to its citizens. It is published in the Indiana Health Law Review: With Liberty And Justice For All: The Case For Decriminalizing Homelessness And Mental Health In America
