News Release:
Friday, June 28, 2024
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 28, 2024
Contact: ACLU of Washington, [email protected]
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled today that the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit cities from punishing unhoused people for sleeping in public, even if they have nowhere else to go.
The court held that punishing a person for sleeping in public, even if they have no other option, punishes conduct, not status, and so Robinson v. California, which established that it is cruel and unusual to criminalize a person’s status, does not apply. The case, Grants Pass v. Johnson, originated from an Oregon city that passed ordinances barring people from sleeping outside in public using a blanket, pillow, or even a cardboard sheet to lie on. In Grants Pass, Oregon, unhoused people could be saddled with hundreds of dollars in fines and even jail time for sleeping outside, even though the city lacked enough shelter beds.
“It is hard to imagine a starker example of excessive punishment than fining and jailing a person for the basic human act of sleeping,” said Scout Katovich, staff attorney in the Trone Center for Justice and Equality. “As Justice Sotomayor’s dissent powerfully acknowledged, sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. We cannot arrest our way out of homelessness, and we will continue litigating against cities that are emboldened by this decision to treat unhoused people as criminals.”
“Everyone deserves a safe space to sleep, but for too long we have been overly reliant on policing as a solution,” said Michele Storms, executive director for the ACLU of Washington. “We cannot punish our way out of homelessness and poverty. Systemic issues require systemic evidence-based solutions and investments in our communities.”
“The fight doesn’t stop here,” said La Rond Baker, legal director for the ACLU of Washington. “The ACLU of Washington has pursued and is continuing to pursue legal strategies to provide protections to individuals under our state constitution as it is more protective than the Eighth Amendment. We will continue to challenge efforts and policies across the state that seek to criminalize people experiencing homelessness.”
The American Civil Liberties Union submitted a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that punishing unhoused people for sleeping outside when they lack access to shelter violates the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment. As the brief highlights, the original intent and meaning of the Eighth Amendment and its application in more than a century of Supreme Court cases make clear that the government cannot impose punishment that is disproportionate to the crime.
The brief goes on to argue that Robinson v. California, which ruled that criminalizing a person’s status is cruel and unusual punishment and was relied upon by the lower courts in Johnson v. Grants Pass, is consistent with this proportionality principle. Applying the same proportionality principle, the brief stated, punishing unhoused people for sleeping in public when they have no other choice violates the Eighth Amendment.
The Court’s decision reverses a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that punishing people experiencing homelessness for sleeping in public when they have no access to shelter violates the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
June 28, 2024
Contact: ACLU of Washington, [email protected]
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled today that the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit cities from punishing unhoused people for sleeping in public, even if they have nowhere else to go.
The court held that punishing a person for sleeping in public, even if they have no other option, punishes conduct, not status, and so Robinson v. California, which established that it is cruel and unusual to criminalize a person’s status, does not apply. The case, Grants Pass v. Johnson, originated from an Oregon city that passed ordinances barring people from sleeping outside in public using a blanket, pillow, or even a cardboard sheet to lie on. In Grants Pass, Oregon, unhoused people could be saddled with hundreds of dollars in fines and even jail time for sleeping outside, even though the city lacked enough shelter beds.
“It is hard to imagine a starker example of excessive punishment than fining and jailing a person for the basic human act of sleeping,” said Scout Katovich, staff attorney in the Trone Center for Justice and Equality. “As Justice Sotomayor’s dissent powerfully acknowledged, sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. We cannot arrest our way out of homelessness, and we will continue litigating against cities that are emboldened by this decision to treat unhoused people as criminals.”
“Everyone deserves a safe space to sleep, but for too long we have been overly reliant on policing as a solution,” said Michele Storms, executive director for the ACLU of Washington. “We cannot punish our way out of homelessness and poverty. Systemic issues require systemic evidence-based solutions and investments in our communities.”
“The fight doesn’t stop here,” said La Rond Baker, legal director for the ACLU of Washington. “The ACLU of Washington has pursued and is continuing to pursue legal strategies to provide protections to individuals under our state constitution as it is more protective than the Eighth Amendment. We will continue to challenge efforts and policies across the state that seek to criminalize people experiencing homelessness.”
The American Civil Liberties Union submitted a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that punishing unhoused people for sleeping outside when they lack access to shelter violates the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment. As the brief highlights, the original intent and meaning of the Eighth Amendment and its application in more than a century of Supreme Court cases make clear that the government cannot impose punishment that is disproportionate to the crime.
The brief goes on to argue that Robinson v. California, which ruled that criminalizing a person’s status is cruel and unusual punishment and was relied upon by the lower courts in Johnson v. Grants Pass, is consistent with this proportionality principle. Applying the same proportionality principle, the brief stated, punishing unhoused people for sleeping in public when they have no other choice violates the Eighth Amendment.
The Court’s decision reverses a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that punishing people experiencing homelessness for sleeping in public when they have no access to shelter violates the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
###
Explore More:
