San Francisco and other cities, following a Supreme Court ruling, are arresting more homeless people for living on the streets
In June 2024, the Supreme Court issued a ruling, Grants Pass v. Johnson, that determined it is constitutional to issue citations to or arrest homeless people, even when there is no available shelter.
The ruling reversed earlier federal appeals court rulings from 2019 and 2022 that determined cities cannot enforce anti-camping laws against homeless people if there are not enough shelter beds available for them.
The Supreme Court's ruling also determined that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments does not protect homeless people from laws criminalizing resting in public places.
As someone who has spent more than a decade researching homelessness and speaking with unhoused communities, I have seen firsthand how enforcement of such laws imposes unavoidable hardships on homeless people and makes it harder for them to find a stable home.
A rise in punitive action against homelessness
In 2024, there were an estimated 771,480 people in the U.S. who experienced homelessness on a single night, the highest number ever recorded.
Since June 2024, almost 220 local measures have passed that restrict or ban acts like sleeping, sitting or panhandling in public in cities that include Phoenix; Gainesville, Florida, and Reno, Nevada.
The rate of unsheltered homelessness, meaning homeless people who are sleeping in places that are not meant for humans to rest in, like parks or cars, is the highest in California.
After the Supreme Court's decision, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order in July 2024 that directs state agencies and departments to adopt new policies that remove homeless encampments. Those are temporary outdoor living spaces used by homeless people, often on public or private property.
Following this executive order, more than two dozen California cities and towns adopted or considered adopting sweeping bans on homeless encampments.
Not every leader has embraced this approach of what some observers call criminalizing homelessness. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, for example, rejected criminalizing homelessness as 'backwards' in June 2024.
Nevertheless, many cities are enforcing existing and new bans on homeless encampments more aggressively than before the Supreme Court decision – despite evidence that such enforcement is not effective in dealing with the problem of homelessness.
The impacts of aggressive enforcement
Research shows that arresting someone without a home for sitting, resting or sleeping in a public place does not reduce homelessness.
Instead, encampment sweeps and camping bans typically displace people from one area to another, while discarding or destroying their personal belongings in the process, such as identification cards, medications and sleeping gear.
This approach also wastes public resources by paying groups to throw away people's belongings instead of investing that money into actual housing solutions, like creating more affordable housing options.
Homeless encampment sweeps by police or other government officials are also shown to make people living in camps sicker, leading to increases in hospitalizations and even deaths among those dependent on drugs or alcohol.
A punitive shift in San Francisco
San Francisco is an example of an American city with a relatively large homeless population that has taken a more aggressive approach to enforcing bans on homeless encampments over the past year.
A few weeks after the Supreme Court decision, then-San Francisco Mayor London Breed promised to be 'very aggressive' in removing homeless encampments. She also said that 'building more housing' would not solve the homelessness crisis.
City data shows that in the 12 months since the Supreme Court ruling, San Francisco police had arrested more than 1,000 homeless people for living in a public space – a scale of enforcement rarely seen in the city's past. In the year leading up to the ruling, 111 people were arrested for illegal lodging
San Francisco identified approximately 8,300 homeless city residents in 2024.
In June 2025, I conducted a survey of 150 homeless people in San Francisco. About 10% of those people who gave a reason for a recent arrest reported being jailed for lodging without permission. Another 6% said they were arrested for trespassing.
In the same survey, which is part of an ongoing project, 54% of homeless San Francisco residents reported being forced to move from a public space at least once.
Another 8% reported being cited for another reason related to trespassing.
A less aggressive path in Portland
Other western American cities with large homeless populations have taken slightly different approaches to removing homelessness encampments since June 2024.
Portland, Oregon, for example, began enforcing a new daytime camping ban in July 2024. But Portland police have only made 11 arrests of homeless people for camping-related violations over the past year.
Other homeless people in Portland have received police citations for other offenses, like trespassing.
As part of my June 2025 study, I surveyed 150 homeless Portland residents. About 49% of respondents reported having been arrested at some point in their lives. Though no respondents were arrested for camping in a prohibited place, 68% of people I spoke with reported that police or other government officers forced them to leave a public space at some point over the past year.
And 13% of those who gave a reason for being cited by police said it was for camping in a prohibited place. Another 11% of homeless people were cited for some other reason related to living without shelter.
As part of the study, I also interviewed residents who had been arrested while living on the street. One Portland resident I interviewed – who asked not to be named to preserve their anonymity – told me they lost the chance to rent an apartment because they were arrested in 2023 on a preexisting, unrelated warrant after a police officer checked their ID – just days before they were supposed to pick up their keys.
'Many unhoused people have warrants simply for failing to appear after being cited for sitting or resting in public space,' they said. 'I was supposed to go get the keys and, bam, I got picked up. I was arrested and went to court. Just me being in jail for five, six or five days screwed it all. I didn't show up to get the keys, and then (the landlord) couldn't get ahold of me, and they had no idea what was going on.'
The weeklong jail stay not only pushed this person back onto the street, but it also put them back onto a waiting list for housing – where they remain in 2025.
Looking ahead
The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling did not mandate that cities criminalize homelessness. But it effectively gave cities the green light to do so without fear of violating people's constitutional protections.
The effects of this ruling will be further felt with President Donald Trump's July 24, 2025, executive order that ended federal support for approaches like Housing First, a policy that prioritizes providing homeless people with housing, before any other needed help. The order also calls for involuntarily committing homeless people with mental illness to mental health institutions.
As more cities consider tougher encampment ordinances, I think it is worth considering if more punitive measures really address homelessness. Decades of evidence suggest they won't.
Instead, arresting homeless people often deepens their poverty, increases displacement and diverts public funding away from the real solution – stable, affordable housing.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Stephen Przybylinski, Michigan State University
Read more:
Supreme Court to consider whether local governments can make it a crime to sleep outside if no inside space is available
Many more Denver teens have experienced homelessness than official counts show
Supreme Court rules cities can ban homeless people from sleeping outdoors – Sotomayor dissent summarizes opinion as 'stay awake or be arrested'
Stephen Przybylinski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
See which police area in the Black Country has one cop per 1,000 people
Dudley is bottom of the Black Country league for police numbers with just one officer for around every 1,000 residents. Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Local Democracy Reporting Service shows there were 326 officers assigned to the Dudley policing area in 2025. Out of the West Midlands Police force areas only Solihull has fewer officers with 255 while Birmingham is the highest at 1,902. READ MORE: Tragedy as man dies after being hit by car near beauty spot READ MORE: Tributes to 'beautiful angel' found dead in Smethwick as three men arrested Read more: Details of yob crackdown include plan to name and shame Read more: Latest data shows pressures in in major hospital A&E Sandwell has 423 officers, Walsall is covered by 366 police officers while Wolverhampton is assigned 392. Superintendent Gill Davenport, from Dudley Local Policing Area (LPA), said: "We have a wide range of teams who work tirelessly to ensure the borough is a safe place to live, work and visit. "We currently have more than 375 police officers and staff who are based in various roles across Dudley; while we can also call on the support of a number of forcewide departments, such as the traffic and dogs units. "As part of our local policing approach we carry out both targeted operations, and routine patrols, across all parts of the borough to address issues which matter to our communities." Government figures show in September 2024 there were 7,995 full-time equivalent officers in West Midlands Police which is not enough according to the police trade union, The West Midlands Police Federation. In January 2025, The federation's secretary, Tim Rogers, said: "The Police Uplift Programme which was launched by the previous Conservative Government saw 20,000 police officers recruited nationwide in the three years up until the end of March 2023. "Of course, forces welcomed the influx of new recruits to boost officer numbers which had fallen so low that many forces were struggling to provide effective policing services for the communities they serve. "But, sadly, that recruitment drive only just took us back to the officer numbers nationwide that we had in 2010. "Not only were police forces dealing with 'traditional' crimes, burglaries, theft, assaults, but they were also learning to adapt to new, emerging and growing crimes, such as human trafficking and cyber-crime with reduced resources but they were also picking up the pieces for other services and organisations that were struggling to cope due to their own budget cuts." Don't miss the biggest and breaking stories by signing up to the BirminghamLive newsletter here Superintendent Davenport added: "There was a near six per cent decrease in total crime in the 12 months up to March 2025, compared to the previous 12 months, with significant reductions in serious youth violence, burglary and robbery. "We're committed to keeping you safe and tackling crime or community concerns."

Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Record homelessness in Utah renews clash between state and Salt Lake City officials
The number of homeless Utahns surged to its highest level ever in 2025 as state leadership continues to debate how to balance enhanced law enforcement and increased funding for an expanded shelter system. Nearly 4,600 Utahns were recorded as homeless during the annual 2025 Point-in-Time Count conducted the final weekend of January, representing an 18% increase from 2024 and the largest number on record. 'We had a huge increase in homelessness,' State Homeless Coordinator Wayne Niederhauser told the Deseret News. 'But we've been effective in responding to it.' The sobering news comes as the nation also reaches record rates of homelessness. On Monday, President Donald Trump federalized the Washington, D.C., police department at least in part in an effort to crack down on the city's homeless encampments. At the end of July, Trump issued an executive order overturning the government's 'housing first' approach to homelessness and instructing agencies to remove obstacles for states to place homeless individuals into long-term institutional care if they pose a risk to themselves or others. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox lauded the move, ordering the Utah Homeless Services Board, which includes Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall, to 'fulfill the President's executive order and uphold public safety' in a letter joined by Utah Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz. In Utah, nearly half of the increase in homelessness was driven by growth in the chronically homeless population — defined as those who have spent at least a year on the streets with a disability, mental illness or drug addiction. The total number of Utahns experiencing chronic homelessness increased by 36% since 2024, from 906 to 1,233. The number of homeless children increased by 12%, from 589 to 662. And the number of homeless seniors over 64 increased by 42% from 251 to 356. There is a 'silver lining' in the data, according to Niederhauser: 95% of the increase was among homeless individuals in shelters — a reversal from the year before when 82% of the growth in homelessness was unsheltered. This is an indication the state's investment in winter emergency shelters is helping keep Utahns off the street, according to Niederhauser. But the overall increase — the largest jump in recent memory — points to the need for a new approach. Why did homelessness shoot up? Utah's record amount of homelessness in 2025 increased the per capita rate to 13 per 10,000 people compared to the previous rate of around 10 or 11 per 10,000. This is still significantly below the national average of 23. In its annual report published Wednesday, the Utah Office of Homeless Services attributed the rise in homelessness to a rapidly growing population that has outpaced the supply of affordable housing and access to behavioral health services. The increase also follows an unprecedented spike in fentanyl being trafficked through the state. Between 2020 and 2024, the quantity of fentanyl seized in Utah increased 95-fold — with interdictions in 2025 nearly overtaking the prior year's record before May. 'The data is clear. There is an overlap between the drugs, the transient-related crime and violent crime,' Salt Lake City Police Chief Brian Redd told the Deseret News. 'There is a connection to those things.' Around two-thirds of Utah's homeless population lives in the Salt Lake City area, according to the Office of Homeless Services. On Wednesday, Redd and Mendenhall held a press conference outside City Hall to send a message to the governor and legislative leadership about where responsibility lies for the growing problem. Wednesday's report 'should be heard as a battle cry,' Mendenhall said, spurring action at the Utah Capitol to fully fund services and shelter space to prevent homelessness, encourage treatment and keep Utahns off of the streets. 'We need our state leaders to prioritize the resources to get this done,' Mendenhall said. 'So to Gov Cox, President Adams and Speaker Schultz, I'm calling on our state leadership to create a sea change that we need to address an issue that impacts all Utahns and just increased by 18%.' In December, Cox; Adams, R-Layton; and Schultz, R-Hooper; sent a strongly worded letter to Mendenhall that called for the city to find solutions to 'eliminate crime and restore public safety' or have the Legislature step in. Mendenhall subsequently provided a public safety plan with 27 recommendations that revolved around remaking city law enforcement and another 23 requests relying on state partners to help close the gap in homeless beds and the criminal justice system. Since Redd has taken over as police chief, the department has taken 'enforcement as far as we can,' answering a record number of 911 calls with a record number of yearly arrests, contributing to a 16-year-low in crime, Mendenhall said. The largest obstacle to changing 'the trajectory of homelessness in Utah,' Mendenhall said, isn't Salt Lake's willingness to crack down on crime, it's the Legislature's commitment to invest in long-term solutions, like funding the so-called 'transformative campus' touted by Cox and lawmakers. 'I'm extremely concerned by the lack of forward momentum from legislative leaders,' Mendenhall said. 'Salt Lake City is making good on our part, but the reality is, this is a humanitarian crisis, this is not something that we can police our way out of.' State leaders push back on Mendenhall Cox, Adams and Schultz pushed back against Mendenhall on Wednesday. Since Utah's homeless numbers began climbing in 2020, the state has invested more than $266 million on addressing homelessness, they said. This level of direct state investment is rare; most states delegate homelessness policy to cities and counties. Cox, Adams and Schultz said the Utah Governor's Office and Legislature remain committed to helping municipal and private-sector partners 'find real solutions.' The overhaul to city law enforcement under Redd has been an encouraging sign, the leaders said. Mendenhall agreed the city and state must work closer together to address homelessness concerns before the Salt Lake City Temple open house in 2027 and the Olympic Winter Games in 2034. 'The city needs to stay focused on its core responsibility of protecting its citizens, keeping streets safe and clean and making our capital a place Utahns can be proud of and visitors want to experience,' Cox, Adams and Schultz said. 'We urge Mayor Mendenhall to turn down the politics and keep working with us to find practical and lasting solutions to this complex issue. Our citizens expect results, not finger-pointing.' During the 2025 legislative session, Utah lawmakers approved, and Cox signed into law, $3.9 million in ongoing funding to launch a second family shelter in Salt Lake County, $5.5 million in one-time funding to expand emergency cold-weather shelter operations statewide and $16.7 million to shore up public resources in shelter cities. Will lawmakers fund the planned shelter? The session prior, the Legislature appropriated $25 million to buy land and construct the future backbone of the state's homelessness response: a 30-acre campus with 1,200-1,600 beds and an integrated system of treatment resources and recovery programs on site. Niederhauser said they are still investigating several potential properties for the campus. But many of them, including an area near the Salt Lake City Airport that the Legislature made available for eminent domain, require wetland studies that will take several more weeks to apply for, and several months to complete through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The priority for Niederhauser's office going into the 2026 legislative session is appropriations to fully fund the construction of the facility because the $25 million they received 'isn't going to be sufficient to do it all,' Niederhauser said. But Niederhauser said they won't put '$25-50 million of infrastructure on the ground' until the Legislature has decided whether it is willing to set aside the necessary annual funding to make the campus functional, 'which is going to be a very large number.' It currently costs the state $15-$20 million to fund the shelter beds that are available, Niederhauser said. And a campus that is actually intended to model operations like Haven For Hope homelessness campus in San Antonio, Texas, could cost twice that much every year. 'We're obviously going to need to have additional funding for the campus, and that'll be a high priority for us,' Niederhauser said. 'That would probably be our focus.' In the meantime before the campus is completed, Niederhauser said the Legislature can appropriate funding to keep the 1,100 winter beds available past April so providers aren't forced to release 'hundreds of additional people to sleep on the street' each spring. Solve the daily Crossword


CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Here's what Putin really wants from Trump – and it's not peace in Ukraine
Alaska is unlikely to have been on many peoples' bingo cards as the venue for a key summit between the leaders of the United States and Russia. Yet America's biggest, remotest state is where Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are now set to meet for one of the most potentially consequential encounters of their presidencies. That's certainly the view from Moscow, where pro-Kremlin propagandists are already flushed with anticipation at the benefits this much-anticipated face-to-face meeting will deliver. Or, more specifically, will deliver for Putin. Firstly, the fact a summit with the US president is being held at all is a massive win for the Kremlin. 'No one is talking about Russia's international isolation anymore, or about our strategic defeat,' wrote Alexander Kots, a prominent pro-Kremlin military blogger on his popular social media channel. He added that the Alaska meeting had 'every chance to become historic.' He may be right. A presidential summit allows Putin to be seen back at the top table of international diplomacy, while thumbing his nose at critics and nations who want him shunned if not arrested on charges of war crimes in Ukraine. And a summit in the US state of Alaska, of all places, is red meat to resurgent Russian nationalists who still bluster about the territory being rightfully theirs. Just across the Bering Strait from the Chukotka region in the Russian Far East, Alaska was once a remote possession of the Russian Empire before being sold to the United States in 1867 for what was, even then, a paltry sum of $7.2 million, about 2 cents an acre. The idea that Moscow got a raw deal still lingers and a visit to 'our Alaska,' as one prominent Russian state TV host dubbed it, bolsters Putin's nationalist credentials. Video clips of Trump misspeaking at a White House news conference ahead of the summit, saying he was going to 'Russia' to meet Putin, have also been trending on Russian social media with captions saying the US president had finally 'admitted it is ours.' For the rest of the world, though, the sole focus of this presidential summit is the war in Ukraine and whether Russia is prepared to make any concessions to end it. The White House has said Trump expects to focus squarely on ending the war in Ukraine, leaving other issues Moscow has said could be up for discussion for another time. On Wednesday, Trump promised 'very severe consequences' if Putin doesn't agree to end his war, following a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders. But so far there's been little sign of real compromise from the Kremlin, which regards itself as having the upper hand on the grinding Ukrainian battlefield. As recently as last month, on a phone call with Trump, Putin reportedly reiterated that Russia would 'continue to pursue its goals to address the root causes' of the conflict in Ukraine – these 'root causes' having previously included long-held Russian grievances that include Ukraine's existence as a sovereign state, and NATO's eastward expansion since the end of the Cold War. More likely, Putin is up to something else. Details have emerged of a Russian peace offer reportedly made to US presidential envoy, Steve Witkoff, before the Alaska summit was hastily arranged. In essence, the proposals involve Kyiv surrendering territory in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, in exchange for a ceasefire, an idea the Ukrainian leadership has firmly ruled out. 'I am not going to surrender my country because I have no right to do so,' said Zelensky ahead of the summit, which he was not invited to. 'If we leave Donbas today, our fortifications, our terrain, the heights we control, we will clearly open a bridgehead for the preparation of a Russian offensive.' But Trump, who is expected to discuss the idea with Putin in Alaska, appears to like the sound of a land-for-peace deal, even one so unpalatable to Ukraine and its European partners. That clear difference of opinion represents an opportunity for Putin to portray the Ukrainians and the Europeans – not Russia – as the real obstacle to peace, potentially undermining Trump's already shaky support for the Ukrainian war effort. Trump has lost patience with Zelensky before, the Kremlin will have noted, and may do so again. If he were to cut off the remaining US military aid and intelligence sharing with Kyiv, Ukraine would struggle to continue its fight even with bolstered European support. Ahead of the summit, the White House appeared to downplay expectations of a peace deal, characterizing the high-stakes meeting as a 'listening exercise.' That may suit Putin just fine. It was, after all, the Kremlin who solicited the summit, according to the White House – possibly as a way of heading off a threat of US tariffs and secondary sanctions that Trump said would kick in last week. Keeping Trump talking may be an effective way of pushing back that deadline indefinitely. More broadly, Putin sees a unique opportunity with Trump to fundamentally reset relations with Washington, and separate Russian ties with the US from the fate of Ukraine, a scenario that would also divide the Western allies. For months, Kremlin officials have been talking up possibilities for economic, technological and space cooperation with the US, as well as lucrative deals on infrastructure and energy in the Arctic and elsewhere. The fact the Kremlin's top economic envoy, Kirill Dmitriev – a key interlocutor with the Trump administration – is part of the Russian delegation to Alaska suggests that more talk of US-Russian deal-making will be on the agenda. And, if Putin gets his way in this summit, the 'Ukraine question' may find itself relegated to just one of many talking points between the powerful leaders of two great powers – and not even the most pressing one.