RHLS responds to the SCOTUS decision on Grants Pass v. Johnson.

a view from the street of the supreme court front steps, all marble columns and statues

We are deeply disappointed by the U. S. Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, Et. Al. where the Court held there is no Constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment for criminalizing homeless people for the basic biological necessity of sleeping in public spaces even when there are no other shelter options available. 

While the Court declined to provide Constitutional protection from criminalization of people in this vulnerable position, the decision in Grants Pass does nothing to change the facts:

  • Housing is the solution to homelessness;
  • Criminalization of homelessness is inhumane, expensive, and ineffective;
  • Just because jurisdictions can punish their vulnerable residents with nowhere to sleep, does not mean they should.

The Court’s decision in Grants Pass risks empowering jurisdictions to enact punitive policies that will further the crisis of homelessness, exacerbate existing racial disparities in housing instability through criminal collateral consequences, and harm our neighbors when they are struggling most.

At RHLS, we and our partners know the answer to the question “How do we end homelessness in America?” is “With homes!”

We are proud of our work advancing proven housing-centered solutions to homelessness.  The Court’s decision in Grants Pass does nothing to diminish the effectiveness, urgency, and possibility of these solutions.

RHLS will continue to fight for solutions for our neighbors by supporting clients engaging in the development and preservation of deeply affordable and supportive housing, through advocacy like the Amicus Brief to the Third Circuit supporting unhoused residents, and continually working with our community partners to create and expand opportunities for funding housing and shelter solutions. The deadly crisis of homelessness facing our community can be solved, not with handcuffs, and fines, but with housing and services.

Some jurisdictions that believe punitive measures are a necessary tool to address homelessness in their communities may feel vindicated by the Court’s decision; they should not. The Court’s decision that these approaches are Constitutionally permissible does nothing to support that they are necessary or effective. The evidence to the contrary is strong and unchanged. For those who cannot see these solutions in their heart, they should find them in the data, or in their pocketbook. Housing-based solutions are more effective and less expensive. 

RHLS joins with the National Homelessness Law Center’s response to the decision in calling for full funding of:

  • Universal rental assistance for lowest-income households  
  • Public housing repair and preservation  
  • National Housing Trust Fund  
  • Eviction and homelessness prevention 
  • Voluntary supportive and emergency services 

To our clients and community partners, we encourage you: stay the course! While the Court’s decision is disappointing, it should not be demoralizing.  At RHLS we are committed to continuing our work together to create, provide, and implement real housing-centered solutions to the crisis of homelessness. Together we can solve the deadly crisis of homelessness, with Housing Not Handcuffs!