April 24. [OPINION] By Aurrita Payne. On April 22, 2024, the Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments in Grants Pass vs. Johnson, one of the most important cases in decades impacting those who are experiencing homelessness. More than 600,000 people are homeless nationwide, according to federal data, and nearly half sleep outside. The Supreme Court will decide if people sleeping on public property, in tent cities, or their cars can be fined, ticketed, or arrested. In the case of Oregon, officials are set to enforce such measures as imposing fines ranging from $75 to $295, and if gone unpaid, could result in jail time.
Unity in Community (UiC), a local grassroots organization concerned with achieving racial equity and social justice in North Mecklenburg, advocates for affordable housing as part of its social justice agenda. Fighting for racial equity is not just a moral duty, but also a strategic pathway to effectively addressing homelessness. Therefore, UiC firmly believes that the Supreme Court must exercise its moral duty in rendering a decision defending homeless individuals and uphold the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits excessive bail, fines, and cruel and unusual punishments.
Where are people supposed to sleep in cities and towns that lack sufficient shelter beds? As Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagen stated, “Sleeping is a biological necessity; sleeping in public is kind of like breathing in public.” Criminalizing one of the most basic of human needs is not going to solve the issues of those who are unhoused as a symptom of fundamental deficiencies in our society.
Please join UiC in calling on our local, state, and federal policymakers to implement, strengthen, and enforce policies for fair and affordable housing, anti-discrimination laws, equitable distribution of resources, including education funding, criminal justice reform, access to affordable healthcare, workplace development, and community investment.
Payne
—Aurrita Payne
Payne is president of Unity in Community North Mecklenburg, a multiracial, volunteer group of individuals committed to achieving racial equity.
Aurrita,
Regarding the Supreme Court case on homeless rights. While I appreciate your dedication to these issues, I find myself respectfully disagreeing with some of the points raised.
Firstly, it’s crucial to distinguish between advocating for racial equity and social justice and the specific issue of homelessness. While both are important, not every societal challenge falls under the umbrella of racial equity.
I noticed the absence of mention regarding the necessity for limits and personal responsibility, akin to those in all zoning laws and regulations. Our rights and liberties do indeed come with responsibilities, including respecting public and personal spaces and the laws that govern them.
Try comparing restrictions on public property to limitations on private property, like not being able to build a pig farm or large chicken coop in my back yard. Public spaces must be maintained for the common good, ensuring they are not misused or abused. Just as my personal property rights come with limits.
The comparison of sleeping in public to breathing in public oversimplifies a complex issue. While sleep is a necessity, so is respecting personal property and space, along with the laws that govern them. Allowing unrestricted camping on public property raises serious health and safety concerns for communities. This was never the intended purpose for public funds. You want a public camping ground fine by me, plan it, build it & before its all over there will still need to have regulations & policies in place.
The assertion that “unhoused is a symptom of fundamental deficiencies in our society” raises valid questions. While systemic issues contribute to homelessness, we must also acknowledge individual responsibilities. Public property should be used with respect and personal responsibility by all users.
I appreciate your call for policymakers to address homelessness, but we must be cautious of solutions that neglect personal responsibility and public order. While advocating for fair housing and resources is crucial, it shouldn’t compromise community safety and well-being.
In conclusion, I believe we need a balanced approach that tackles both systemic issues contributing to homelessness and the need for accountability. This isn’t about removing rights or opportunities but ensuring that public spaces remain safe and accessible for all.
Thank you for sparking this important discussion, Aurrita . I hope we can continue this dialogue constructively on these complex issues.
Posted by Joe a vagnone | April 24, 2024, 1:18 pmWell said, Mr. Vagnone!
Posted by Concerned citizen | April 24, 2024, 6:31 pmSpot on comment by Mr. Vagnone!
Posted by Jim Naylor | April 25, 2024, 9:45 am