City and states have failed to keep their unhoused residents safe. Now they're asking the Supreme Court for permission to arrest people for the crime of having nowhere else to go.
While I appreciate the Band reference (if that was the intent), I'm sorry the shape you're in is a default anti-elitism rant. In some ways like immigration, the homeless issue is multi-faceted, nuanced, and has proven intractable over the years for many reasons. And much of it is related to drug abuse and mental health. But it must be easy to tar people with a "NIMBY" tag because I see it on twitter all the time. I don't believe I saw you propose a solution. If everyone on the street should be sheltered, agreed, tell us how and how much. (And what about those who refuse shelter?) We can all oppose arresting people, but then what? Thanks for doing Balls and Strikes, Andrew Ross
The ruling in Martin v. Boise actually still allows camping bans to be enforced against people who refuse shelter, just not against people who are turned away from shelters.
(Though FWIW, if a significant number of people are refusing shelter, I think that almost certainly indicates a serious problem with the shelter options, rather than a problem with the people. So the problem should be solvable, without needing to arrest folks, as long as there's political will.)
While I appreciate the Band reference (if that was the intent), I'm sorry the shape you're in is a default anti-elitism rant. In some ways like immigration, the homeless issue is multi-faceted, nuanced, and has proven intractable over the years for many reasons. And much of it is related to drug abuse and mental health. But it must be easy to tar people with a "NIMBY" tag because I see it on twitter all the time. I don't believe I saw you propose a solution. If everyone on the street should be sheltered, agreed, tell us how and how much. (And what about those who refuse shelter?) We can all oppose arresting people, but then what? Thanks for doing Balls and Strikes, Andrew Ross
> And much of it is related to drug abuse and mental health.
That belief is widespread, but it's not really supported by the data. Aaron Carr of the Housing Rights Initiative has an informative post on the subject: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-about
> And what about those who refuse shelter?
The ruling in Martin v. Boise actually still allows camping bans to be enforced against people who refuse shelter, just not against people who are turned away from shelters.
(Though FWIW, if a significant number of people are refusing shelter, I think that almost certainly indicates a serious problem with the shelter options, rather than a problem with the people. So the problem should be solvable, without needing to arrest folks, as long as there's political will.)