How President Trump's executive order on homelessness could affect Rhode Island
The July executive order, titled 'Ending Crime and Disorder on America's Streets,' directs federal agencies to prioritize grants for state and local governments that ban homeless encampments and loitering, among other practices. The order also calls on the attorney general to reverse court decisions that limit the government from involuntarily detaining people who are homeless and relocating those experiencing mental illness or addiction issues.
'From having talked to my colleagues across the country, it's just horribly scary,' said Kimberly Simmons, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition to End Homelessness. 'The Trump-Vance administration does not seem to understand that some of the social ills in our communities are not going to be fixed by putting people in jail or having them illegally moved from their encampments.'
Like many of the president's other executive orders, the directive has been criticized for its vagueness, and it remains unclear if or when the measures could go into effect.
How will the executive order affect Rhode Island?
Rhode Island's housing shortage has been linked to skyrocketing rents and home prices that can exacerbate homelessness. In January, Redfin ranked Providence as the least affordable metro area in the United States.
'This executive order will put municipalities in the position of determining how they want to address the housing problem affecting the state,' noted Steven Brown, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island. 'If they want to take the punitive approach that the Trump administration is suggesting and take funds to do that … well, the ACLU and other organizations will be pushing municipalities to stay away from these funding opportunities. They simply will not work.'
Simmons explained that the vast majority of homeless shelters nationwide rely on grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which also supports affordable housing programs and other resources for preventing homelessness. In 2024, Rhode Island received more than $30 million worth of state and local HUD grants.
The executive order directs HUD, as well as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Transportation, to prioritize doling out those grants to communities that crack down on encampments, squatting, illicit drug use and tracking sex offenders.
However, the order ignores research-backed strategies for combating homelessness, said Simmons. One widely used approach is the 'housing first' philosophy, which favors securing permanent housing for unhoused individuals and families as soon as possible, as opposed to prolonged shelter stays, because it increases their likelihood of achieving long-term housing stability.
'The services we provide are evidence-based,' added Simmons. 'These aren't things people are just dreaming up.'
RI cities and towns enacting camping bans
The executive order's stated purpose is to abolish 'endemic vagrancy, disorderly behavior, sudden confrontations and violent attacks.' Brown explained how the language attempts to distance politicians and lawmakers from the country's worsening homelessness crisis.
'There's no question that the executive order is an attempt to smear all homeless people and blame them for their situation when it is often government policies themselves that have created their homelessness,' he said. 'It's especially ironic and disturbing coming from this administration, which has gleefully taken away important safety net programs.'
In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled it was constitutional to issue citations or arrest unhoused people for sleeping outside. Since then, Cranston, West Warwick and Woonsocket have all implemented camping bans to target homeless encampments. Conversely, in Providence, the City Council passed an ordinance this year to prohibit fining people for sleeping or camping on public property.
Rhode Island became the first state to pass a Homeless Bill of Rights in 2012, which codified the right for unhoused people to move about freely in public and receive the same level of privacy in tents as permanent residences, among other protections. Recent years have seen proposals to add more details and protections to the document as unhoused Rhode Islanders continue to report violations of their rights by police officers or other municipal authorities.
'I'm hopeful that the fact there is a Homeless Bill of Rights in Rhode Island is a signal that this state rejects the very punitive approach the Trump executive order proposes,' said Brown. 'I certainly hope that once there's more concreteness to the executive order, municipal leaders will take a stand and be clear that they will reject funding that requires implementation of punitive measures to address homelessness.'
Addressing shortages
Gov. Dan McKee faced mounting public pressure to declare a public emergency last winter when shelters around the state were inundated, culminating in a serious shelter bed shortage during the coldest time of year. The waiting list for shelter beds is expected to worsen with a 56% reduction from last year in state funding for homeless services.
Simmons said her team has been working closely with the Rhode Island State Council of Churches to create more cooling and warming centers, as nonprofit organizations help fill the gap.
'There are other options, like eviction policies and how we manage legally going into encampments,' she said, suggesting policy solutions that don't require substantial funding. 'There are things we could do that would benefit the most vulnerable people who are struggling, so I think that's where we're going to focus a whole lot of our advocacy and attention.'
This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: Trump's executive order on homelessness will have impacts in RI
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SoftBank and Trump may not be enough to save Intel
Intel's (INTC) stock got a boost on Tuesday after SoftBank Group announced Monday that it would take a $2 billion stake in the struggling chipmaker. Shares of Intel climbed more than 8% in midday trading. The news followed a Bloomberg report last week that the Trump administration is considering taking up to a 10% stake in the company. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed in a CNBC interview Tuesday that the investment would involve the US government converting Intel's grants from the Biden-era CHIPS and Science Act — worth $10.9 billion — into an equity stake aimed at stabilizing the company's US manufacturing business. Bessent did not confirm the size of the stake the government would take. Intel has fallen behind in an industry it once dominated. Its manufacturing division is bleeding cash, just as its legacy computer chip segment forfeits market share to rivals Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Qualcomm (QCOM) in the PC space. Intel is also woefully behind AMD and Nvidia (NVDA) in the AI race. The company's market capitalization of $111 billion is less than half of its value in 2021. And CEO Lip-Bu Tan has been forced to lay off 15% of the company's workforce and shelve plans to build plants in Europe. But the troubled chipmaker is the only large-scale US-based leading-edge chip manufacturer, giving it geopolitical significance as the nation looks to reshore semiconductor production. Intel's problems, however, may be too big for either SoftBank or the Trump administration to solve on their own. Intel in need of direction Deutsche Bank analyst Ross Seymore said news of the US potentially taking a stake in Intel, combined with the SoftBank investment, shows that "[Tan] is taking bold actions to solidify Intel's financial and strategic positioning during its ongoing difficult transformation process." Tan became CEO in March after Intel's board ousted former CEO Pat Gelsinger late last year. But others on Wall Street expressed skepticism that those investments would be enough to save Intel from its decline, which resulted from years of missteps. Loop Capital analyst Gary Mobley wrote in a recent note to clients that the support from SoftBank and, potentially, the US government may be "akin to a lifeline with no secure anchor at the other end," because while Intel may be "finding new buyers of its primary equity capital," that may not guarantee it can find customers for its manufacturing business. Gelsinger established Intel's third-party chip manufacturing business, otherwise known as its Foundry, in 2021 as a means of competing with rival TSMC, which produces chips for companies including Nvidia, Apple (AAPL), AMD, and others. But so far, its Foundry business has been a disappointment, struggling to secure customers. While Intel has said it reached agreements to build chips for Amazon (AMZN) and Microsoft (MSFT), the company is still its own largest manufacturing client. Intel's plan includes building chips based on newer technologies, including its 18A and upcoming 14A node design processes, part of Gelsinger's plan for five process nodes in four years. But 18A, which was initially supposed to roll out in the first half of 2025, is now slated to debut in 2026. Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon was similarly critical of Intel's cash infusion in his own investor note, writing, "We do not believe that Intel's capability gap has anything to do with money." Rasgon also questioned whether the US taking a stake in Intel would be enough to complete the company's domestic manufacturing expansions. "Intel was originally supposed to get these CHIPS Act funds for free; giving up 10% of the company for them seems worse," he wrote in a note to clients. "And if the goal is to help Intel build substantial US capacity, $10.9B really isn't enough." Moor Insights and Strategy founder and chief analyst Patrick Moorhead told Yahoo Finance that while SoftBank's $2 billion investment and the prospect of a potential US stake are good things, the company would require as much as $40 billion to build out its next-generation 14A technology. Still, getting the US government involved, at least in the short term, could prove to be a boon for the company. "My short-term answer is that the US government is a kingmaker, and they just made Intel the king, and they are going to wrap policy around that to make Intel foundry successful," Moorhead said. If the government sticks with Intel for the long haul, though, Moorhead said it could further complicate the company's development problems, leading to a lack of innovation, inefficiencies, and growing costs. "My hope is that Intel gets back on its feet, it turns itself into a reputable, leading-edge foundry, and the government sells the stake," he said. Laura Bratton is a reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow her on Bluesky @ Email her at Email Daniel Howley at dhowley@ Follow him on X/Twitter at @DanielHowley. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US appeals court puts the brakes on contested land transfer for Arizona copper mine
A U.S. appeals court has temporarily blocked the transfer of federal forest land in Arizona to a pair of international companies that plan to mine one of the largest copper deposits in North America. The transfer was scheduled for Tuesday. But a panel of judges with the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals issued a temporary injunction late Monday in response to last-minute appeals by a Native American tribe and environmentalists. The land includes Oak Flat — an area used for centuries for religious ceremonies, prayer and gathering of medicinal plants by the San Carlos Apache people and other Native American tribes. The fight over Oak Flat has spanned two decades, with the latest legal wrangling centered on a required environmental review that was released by the U.S. Forest Service earlier this summer and an appraisal of the land to be mined by Resolution Copper about 60 miles (96 kilometers) east of Phoenix. Before the land exchange can happen, the plaintiffs argued that the federal government must prepare a comprehensive review that covers 'every aspect of the planned mine and all related infrastructure.' They said the government failed to consider the potential for a dam breach, pipeline failure and if there was an emergency plan for a tailings storage area. As for the appraisal, they said it doesn't account for the value of the copper deposits that are at least 5,000 feet (1,500 meters) below the surface. The appeals court plans to hear arguments on the merits of the case later this year. Opponents of the mine consider the court action a victory, saying prayers are paying off. 'This injunction comes in a desperate time of asking for miracles, all over the country and all over the world,' Wendsler Nosie Sr. of the group Apache Stronghold said in a statement shared on social media. Nosie, a former tribal chairman, described the land and water at Oak Flat as precious. Apache Stronghold, the San Carlos Apache Tribe and other plaintiffs having been fighting for years to save what tribal members call Chi'chil Bildagoteel. The area is dotted with oak groves and traditional plants the Apaches consider essential to their religion. 'We will continue praying that the court understands the grave injustice of trading our sacred grounds to foreign mining companies that seek to destroy Chí'chil Biłdagoteel to extract copper that will be exported overseas,' Tribal Chairman Terry Rambler said in statement. Resolution Copper — a subsidiary of international mining giants Rio Tinto and BHP — estimates the mine will generate $1 billion a year for Arizona's economy and create thousands of jobs. The project has support in the nearby community of Superior. Resolution Copper has said the project underwent an extensive review by the U.S. Forest Service that has included consultation with tribes that have ancestral ties to the land. 'The collaborative process has directly led to major changes to the mining plan to preserve and reduce potential impacts on tribal, social, environmental and cultural interests,' the company stated. The Forest Service has argued in court filings that it has no discretion because the land exchange was mandated by Congress when language was included in a must-pass national defense spending bill that was signed into law in 2014 by then-President Barack Obama. There have been unsuccessful legislative attempts in the years since to withdraw the Oak Flat area from mining activity. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DOD to offer new medal for personnel deployed to Southern Border
The Pentagon announced a new military decoration that will recognize service members stationed at the U.S.-Mexico border as part of the Trump administration's effort to bolster border security. A U.S. defense official confirmed to Military Times the veracity of a memorandum regarding the medal that began circulating online several days ago. 'Effective immediately, the Mexican Border Defense Medal (MBDM), is hereby established to recognize Service members deployed to the U.S. international border with Mexico for DoD support to United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP),' a memo uploaded to the Navy subreddit reads. Previously, service members collaborating with CBP were awarded the Armed Forces Service Medal, but the Mexican Border Defense Medal will take its place, according to the memo. Military personnel qualify for the medal if they have been 'permanently assigned, attached, or detailed to a unit that deployed' in support of a military operation supporting CBP within 100 nautical miles of the U.S.-Mexico border after Jan. 20, 2025, when President Trump assumed office. After chase, US Navy, Coast Guard intercept 1,296 pounds of cocaine Military personnel must have operated within Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California or the adjacent U.S. waters out to 24 nautical miles, the memo said. Service members and veterans can apply to have their Armed Forces Service Medal swapped out with the Mexican Border Defense Medal, but they are not allowed to possess both at once. Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 20 to deter the 'unlawful mass migration' of illegal aliens into the United States by deploying supplemental military personnel along the Southern Border, among other strategies. Over the last eight months, the administration has ramped up its border security mission. U.S. Northern Command established Joint Task Force-Southern Border on March 14, 2025, to lead immigration enforcement efforts. As of July 2, approximately 8,500 military personnel were attached to the task force. The administration has also deployed the U.S. Navy to intercept and halt the flow of illicit drugs into the country. On Aug. 11, U.S. Navy Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer Sampson, along with the U.S. Coast Guard, intercepted 1,296 pounds of cocaine from a drug smuggling vessel. Solve the daily Crossword
