US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps • Hacker News Board

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#51

Post by thegrim33 » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:21 PM UTC

delecti wrote: post #17

tomcam wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a dumb decision?

It makes it, not just de facto, but de jure illegal to be poor. If someone can't afford a home, where are they meant to go? Just fuck off and die?

I know you're not actually asking for answer but the US spends trillions of dollars a year supporting homeless and otherwise disadvantaged people. There are public programs that exist solely to provide these people the help they need. In most cities something like half the homeless refuse free shelter.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#52

Post by Xylakant » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:21 PM UTC

PessimalDecimal wrote: post #29

delecti wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it, not just de facto, but de jure illegal to be poor. If someone can't afford a home, where are they meant to go? Just fuck off and die?

What about going to a homeless shelter, or to a municipality that does allow homeless encampments?

What if just all municipalities forbid homeless encampments? The result of this will be a race to the bottom, as more and more municipalities ban homeless camps, the negative effects will concentrate on fewer and fewer municipalities, making the issue worse and worse. This will in turn drive them to forbid camps as well.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#53

Post by Mountain_Skies » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:21 PM UTC

The Court didn't make it illegal for cities to provide services to the homeless. Some, many, (most?) simply find it easier to push homeless around between each other and off into the margins (outside of their municipal boundaries) instead of addressing the issue. The Court isn't a social services agency and rulings shouldn't be made on that basis. Cites, states, and even the federal government have the power to address homelessness. Using homeless camps as a perverse bottom tier safety net isn't a solution and is completely tangential to the legality of regulating their existence. I don't understand this notion that court rulings should be based on social policy instead of Constitutional law.

Once again, governments are not being limited in their ability to go out and provide services.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#54

Post by crooked-v » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:21 PM UTC

PessimalDecimal wrote: post #29

delecti wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it, not just de facto, but de jure illegal to be poor. If someone can't afford a home, where are they meant to go? Just fuck off and die?

What about going to a homeless shelter, or to a municipality that does allow homeless encampments?

There aren't even nearly enough homeless shelters. That holds the same basically everywhere in the US with a significant homeless population, except for those specific locations with a right to shelter law, like NYC.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#55

Post by tedivm » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:21 PM UTC

PessimalDecimal wrote: post #29

delecti wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it, not just de facto, but de jure illegal to be poor. If someone can't afford a home, where are they meant to go? Just fuck off and die?

What about going to a homeless shelter, or to a municipality that does allow homeless encampments?

Before this case went to the supreme court, if a city offered someone on the street access to a homeless shelter then they were allowed to force the person to move. It was only when the city did not have shelter space that they were no longer allowed to criminalize the person for existing on public property.

Now the city doesn't even have to offer bed space.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#56

Post by notaustinpowers » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:22 PM UTC

loeg wrote: post #28

notaustinpowers wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are enough vacant homes in the US to give every homeless person 25 homes. That is not the root cause of the problem.

This is a vacuous argument. The vacant homes are largely either temporary (moving out before prepping to sell) or in the wrong places (no jobs). The homeless need more homes where they live and work (or seek work).

Have you seen the housing market in the past few years? Skyrocketing interest rates and construction levels not seen since before 2007, all which (to any economist who passed ECON 101 would say would lower housing costs) and homes are still 40% more expensive than they were in 2020.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#57

Post by araes » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:22 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #12

Big W for the prison industrial complex.

I'd check for an uptick in prison related stocks and commodities, except they're buried under the post-debate slump. Maybe in a few days. Supreme Court decisions probably take a few days to filter out to the somewhat less news obsessive parts of society.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#58

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:22 PM UTC

notaustinpowers wrote: post #46

paxys wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bunch of cheap land or vacant homes 3000 miles away aren't going to solve the homeless problem in your city, or any other major urban area. Ultimately people stay where they want to stay, for a variety of reasons.

And saying "just build more houses" isn't going to solve it either.

[deleted]

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#59

Post by underlipton » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:22 PM UTC

wilg wrote: post #5

Dumb decision, but we really just gotta build more homes mainly. A good overview of why this is the best solution to homelessness: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-...

The best solution to homelessness is to crash the housing market so thoroughly that the idea of residential homes as investments becomes anathema for 2 or 3 generations. Then you enact Georgist land policy and loosen zoning and Bob's your uncle.

Re: US Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps

#60

Post by PheonixPharts » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 7:23 PM UTC

coolspot wrote: post #24

Homeless need shelter and help. It is inhumane that we let them rot on the streets. City dwellers need safe and clean streets and public transportation. Kids should be able to walk to school by themselves. These two things don’t need to be in conflict.

Many people misunderstand what this case was about.

> Homeless need shelter and help. It is inhumane that we let them rot on the streets.

The issue being argued was not that homeless should be able to camp where ever and whenever they want. This issue was that if you don't provide shelter then you cannot kick them out of public spaces.

If that was the law, then it would mean you need to build shelters if you don't want homeless in the streets.

What this new verdict means is:

- You can forcibly remove homeless people who have nowhere else to go

- Thus homelessness can be effectively illegal

- The only realistic solutions now are:

    - Put the homeless in prisons

    - Move them to cities and towns that don't have the resources to remove them.