Anti-camping laws have been a topic of discussion recently, particularly given the U.S. Supreme Court’s monumental decision in Johnson v. Grants Pass, in which they upheld a law used by authorities in an Oregon city to bar people experiencing homelessness from sleeping in public parks and streets. Let’s examine what these laws are, explore the effects of their enforcement, and discuss alternatives that address the ongoing crisis of homelessness more compassionately and effectively.

Q: What are anti-camping laws?
A: Anti-camping laws are local ordinances that prohibit camping or sleeping in public spaces, such as parks, sidewalks, and streets. In addition, several cities in Washington, from Seattle to Spokane, have enacted sit-and-lie laws, which generally prohibit sitting or lying on public sidewalks during specific hours or in designated areas. These laws aim to regulate where individuals experiencing homelessness can rest or seek shelter.

Q: How does the Supreme Court ruling in the Grants Pass case affect laws like these?
A: The court’s decision in Grants Pass changed federal law and potentially impacts statutes, policies and approaches in the nine states that are a part of the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, including Washington, California, Oregon, and the six other western states where the bulk of America’s unhoused population lives. The ruling allows cities to ban people from sleeping or camping in public places.

Q: What are the effects of enforcing anti-camping and sit and lie laws?
A: Anti-camping and sit-and-lie laws criminalize homelessness. When people have nowhere else to sleep or rest, their choice to camp and rest outside is not voluntary. These laws disproportionately impact vulnerable populations, making homelessness a punishable offense. Additionally, arresting and/or fining people experiencing homelessness for sleeping or resting in public places contributes to our ongoing problem of mass incarceration and diverts resources from addressing the root causes of homelessness.

 
Q: Why should we care?
A: Homelessness affects real people — our neighbors, friends, and community members. Laws that seek to criminalize homelessness exacerbate their struggles and perpetuate a cycle of instability. In addition, the criminal legal system spends valuable resources on enforcing these laws. Redirecting these resources towards housing solutions would be more effective. A compassionate approach benefits everyone. When we prioritize housing and support services, we create healthier, safer communities.

Q: What are some alternatives to laws that criminalize homelessness?
A: We must adopt a housing first approach, which prioritizes providing stable housing without preconditions. This approach recognizes that housing is a fundamental human right and that addressing other issues, such as mental health, addiction, or employment, is more effective when someone has a stable place to live. Combining affordable low-income housing with on-site services such as counseling, addiction treatment, and job training, helps individuals transition out of homelessness while addressing underlying challenges. One successful example is Houston, Tx., which revamped its entire system over the course of a decade to prioritize housing first principles and cut its rate of homelessness by more than 50%.

Rapid rehousing programs, which focus on quickly moving individuals or families experiencing homelessness into permanent housing and provides short-term rental assistance, case management, and support services to help people stabilize and maintain their housing is another effective option.

Another alternative that has shown promising outcomes is the Basic Income Project in Denver, Co., in which the city provided unhoused residents a basic income of $1,000 a month for one year and resulted in 45% of participants securing stable housing within the first ten months. The program also led to fewer nights spent in shelters, jail incarcerations, hospital stays, and emergency room visits, so far saving the city nearly $600,000 due to the reduced use of public services.

Data shows that successful programs prioritize dignity, stability, and long-term solutions over punitive measures and often involve collaboration between community members, local governments, and advocacy groups. Each community’s needs and resources vary, so a combination of these approaches may be most effective.

Q: How can I stay up to date with ACLU-WA’s work?
A: If you would like to stay informed about current issues and campaigns, upcoming events, and how you can get more involved in the fight to protect and expand civil liberties, sign up for our Action Alert email list. If you’d like to get engaged in our work directly, sign up for our activist mobilization project, the Power Up Network.