Advocates react to Supreme Court ruling allowing cities to ban homeless encampments
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 чер 2024
- In a major decision, the Supreme Court made its ruling in the Grants Pass v. Johnson case.
The court's conservative-leaning justices voted in favor of the small Oregon town for enforcing camping bans on public grounds. The encampment bans have been used to target the homeless population living in Grant Pass.
Dickinson College president John Jones, who is a former federal judge, said the justices had to answer whether these encampment bans violate the Constitution.
“The contention was that because it called for fines and 30-day imprisonment for repeat offenses that violated the 8th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment," said Jones.
In the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that homelessness is a complex issue with many causes. However, he argued that the 8th Amendment does not give federal judges the job of, "assessing those causes [of homelessness] and devising those responses.
Read the full article here: www.fox43.com/article/news/lo...
WPMT-FOX43's UA-cam channel is a hub for the best of FOX43 News and its investigative reports, top headlines, and digital exclusive content:
/ fox43 SUBSCRIBE: / fox43
Pack it up get a job
Time to clean up
Ah so SCOTUS says it's illegal to be unhoused now.
then do your part and take a few in to live with you...dont be a hypocrite please
Yeah , you knew they were going to criminalize poverty in America eventually , especially with a right-wing court. Don't lose your housing, or it's off to prison ..
@@libtardh8er You probably want to look up the definition of "hypocrite". Housing people at your house has nothing to do with jailing people for being poor. They need to start teaching critical thinking in school again..
@@libtardh8er
Who says I haven't.
@@z2z3z45 its not criminalizing poverty, its criminalizing laziness
It's funny how we have money for all these wars and other countries but can't house Americans.
SCOTUS decided correctly, however, it's not their jurisdiction. Their decision should be ignored when the case itself violates the separation of powers.
so, basically, if there is literally no place for one to sleep, lets say because the government becomes 'tyrannical' and makes private property 'unattainable', the 'mere act' of 'sleeping' can be 'illegal?' Really? That's ridiculous.
Maybe the court should have changed part of it or made the bar higher, but this is clearly not okay. It's illegal to exist then and that is 'plainly' 'counter' to the constitution.
This was a good decision. Also, people living on the street can go to areas outside of the city rather than build makeshift structures wherever they so choose.
Have you surrendered your bed to the homeless yet? Your yard, front and back?
Your living room?
If not, you really lack the moral high ground to tell business owners to simply turn a blind eye and watch their investments deteriorate because of someone elses unfortunate scenario or life choices.
The city leadership should protect the interests of individuals who have invested in their cities by offering trade and also employing the local citizens (both mom and pop businesses and major corporations).
What about those very real people? Where are your concerns for them? What grace are you offering the contributors?
@@zero_grav_originalthat's a lame response. What's outside of the city? All you're saying without saying it is out of sight, out of mind, who gives a sh!+ about them!
Count your blessings, that can be you any day 🤡
100% facts. Where is the love? Most of them are good people but just have difficulty keeping up with society
If they cannot care for their own well being (that includes drug addiction) should go to various institutional housing, either mental health facilities, prisons or large unleased warehouses (which would cost less than all the costs of crime, social services and lost property revenue from commerce closing due to the problems caused). If they aren’t contributing to society in any way then they have voluntarily given up any right to be free in society.
"Homebodies" don't like to be "fat-shamed" yet have a nasty habit of "home-shaming" City Settlers by labeling them "homeless or houseless." Where are the settlers' landings that once enriched and accommodated city newcomers? Many of these home-shamers are distant descendants of settlers enjoying their rich American Heritage -- and yet because of that wouldn't think twice about "home-shaming American Indians" now either.
People have different needs. People with addictions have problems based on their own decisions. People are in prison because they decided to break the law. Some because they were influenced by people who have lived a life of crime. Some are lazy and don't want to work. Lumping everyone together like cattle will not to eradicate homelessness. Address problems based on individual's history, recidivism and needs.
More mental hospitals
Here we go, homeless people not Worth a thing on the street but in jail watch the money flow, hear we go, hear we go, where the money go ? homeless people not Worth a penny but in jail equal cash flow, who gets the flow ? Systems change life's for the good not to make cycles that repeat but a lot of money flows but no change in people lifes sound like don't fall short or go broke free will low money, get separated more and more who got the flow don't affect them call already know but the flow !!!
This sound crazy (go test for show) homeless is problem, but think about how much they help the economy, mental health, health insurance , pills, food but they don't work for it , EYE know, but trillion invested and not a things is changing people getting pay add that to the list also if that's the plan because homeless is problem try something different 👉going with your flow 👈 but think, is putting a drug addict in jail in long run going to help Yes or No ? and when these things happen that violating free will and it affect drug addicted family also, its not like saying all the money the systems making in this free will violation broken in process is going forward for the apartment or homes 👉its no balancing when take come first but Most all ready know !!!
Coincidence perse don't like that word, EYE believe all things connect directly or indirectly to some may say sound absurd , ground, sky, colors mountains, seeds, birds, WORD texting beings beautiful truth (you) hearing these words, let's get the point as EYE sleep on crub (coincidencly) sounds absurd 👈 get all the homeless off the street, don't want to except between them and EYE, Newsom specifically, you wont miss jail keep sacrifice me and family, Sovereign can't live free ? the shin on CA leader, can't not see ? will ask Williams Bailey homeless leader helping poverty increase ,these crime need to stop decease, pass these to a leader or people that speak, one question with recorder on important believe 👉 how is Sovereign ANDRE D MASE SILAS on the streets Im on the cross going to pass me by according !!!
Well they can't live in the city can they