CORRESPONDENCE - 11A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ANRRICAN CIVIL tIGPflNfALIR@N uNION utSPPYHBflH^_AY SIAND FOR JUS 1 3 t f people for being disabled and/or homeless by giving them citations for sleeping, resting, or lying down with their belongings — innocent activities they cannot avoid. Here, if the City cites persons for being homeless, a chronic condition that these individuals acquired innocently and involuntarily, the City is punishing them because of their status alone, which is beyond the power of the government to do. See Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 666 (1962). In Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1132 (9th Cir. 2006), the Ninth Circuit applied the principle articulated in Robinson, 370 U.S. at 666 — that the Eighth Amendment prohibits punishment based on a person's "status" — and held that the City could not enforce the ordinance against homeless individuals for involuntarily sitting, lying down, and sleeping in public when the number of homeless persons in the City surpassed the number of shelter beds.' Here, the City continues to criminalize the act or condition of sleeping outdoors in public spaces. Such acts, however, are "universal and unavoidable consequences of being human." Jones, 444 F.3d at 1136. The homeless individuals living in Santa Ana have no choice but to sleep in public because they cannot access a legal place to sleep. Currently, Orange County only has enough shelter beds to accommodate approximately half of the people experiencing homelessness. Therefore, sleeping in public is "involuntary and inseparable from" their status or condition of being homeless, and the City's criminalization of such status violates the federal Constitution. Id. Being too poor to afford a home is not a trine. The unsheltered residents of Santa Ana are in crisis, and they need justice. The City should meet their basic survival needs rather than punish them for being poor. And it should not criminalize private organizations that attempt to till the gaps left by its failure to respect every person's basic human right to food, water, medical care, hygiene, and housing. We strongly urge you to follow the law and respect the constitutional rights of those individuals who are homeless and living in Santa Ana, and the humanitarian organizations that seek to help them. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this issue further, please feel free to contact me at (714) 450-3967 or ea.aufiownnaclusocaJ.grg or our Staff Attorney for the Freedom of Speech and Government Transparency Project at binanime(ci�achrsocAmM. Kindest regards, Eve Garrow Homelessness Policy Analyst and Advocate, Dignity for All Project, ACLU of Southern California 'Although the Jones decision was vacated pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties, 505 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2007), its logic reasoning, and analysis of Supreme Court precedent remains sound and persuasive. The U.S. Department of Justice has recently supported the reasoning in Jones and urged its adoption. U.S. Dept. of Justice Stmt of Interest Br. At 4, Bell v. City of Boise, No. 1:09-cv-540 (D. Idaho Aug. 6, 2015).