Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Boise officially asks U.S. Supreme Court to hear homeless camping case
From the kick them while they're down department:
Boise formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider its appeal in the case of Martin v. Boise, the “camping lawsuit” that arose from enforcement of a city ordinance that banned people who are homeless from sleeping in public places.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in September that cities cannot prosecute people for sleeping on the streets if there is nowhere else for them to go, saying that violates the Eighth Amendment and amounts to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment. The city on Thursday filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, an order of a higher court to a lower court to send documents of a case so that the higher court may review a decision. That request starts the review of the case and the process for determining whether the Supreme Court will accept the case.
“If the 9th Circuit’s ruling is allowed to stand, then cities will not have the tools they need to prevent a humanitarian crisis on their own streets,” Mayor David Bieter said in a news release. “We hope the Supreme Court takes this case to restore the power of local communities to regulate the use of their streets, parks and other public areas.”
Howard Belodoff, associate director of Idaho Legal Aid Services and one of the attorneys representing the prosecuted homeless people from the beginning, said he felt the 9th Circuit ruled correctly, making a “well-reasoned and accurate decision.” Eric Tars, another attorney on the case and the legal director at the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, agreed. “The simple fact is that every human being needs a safe, legal place to sleep,” Tars said in an emailed statement. “Far from crippling cities, the 9th Circuit’s decision recognizes this truth and leaves cities a wide range of constructive ways of addressing homelessness which are more effective, and cost-effective, than continuing to lock people up or give them fines for simply needing to sleep safely at night.”
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in September that cities cannot prosecute people for sleeping on the streets if there is nowhere else for them to go, saying that violates the Eighth Amendment and amounts to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment. The city on Thursday filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, an order of a higher court to a lower court to send documents of a case so that the higher court may review a decision. That request starts the review of the case and the process for determining whether the Supreme Court will accept the case.
“If the 9th Circuit’s ruling is allowed to stand, then cities will not have the tools they need to prevent a humanitarian crisis on their own streets,” Mayor David Bieter said in a news release. “We hope the Supreme Court takes this case to restore the power of local communities to regulate the use of their streets, parks and other public areas.”
Howard Belodoff, associate director of Idaho Legal Aid Services and one of the attorneys representing the prosecuted homeless people from the beginning, said he felt the 9th Circuit ruled correctly, making a “well-reasoned and accurate decision.” Eric Tars, another attorney on the case and the legal director at the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, agreed. “The simple fact is that every human being needs a safe, legal place to sleep,” Tars said in an emailed statement. “Far from crippling cities, the 9th Circuit’s decision recognizes this truth and leaves cities a wide range of constructive ways of addressing homelessness which are more effective, and cost-effective, than continuing to lock people up or give them fines for simply needing to sleep safely at night.”
more here:
https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/community/boise/article234271652.html#storylink=mainstage_lead