Liberal Justices Come Out Swinging In Uphill Battle Over Criminalizing Homelessness

I’m all in favor of more funding for mental health care. However one of the major problems with the mentally ill homeless, is the very large percentage who could be helped with medication but refuse treatment.

I have way too much personal history with a family member who was severely bipolar to the point of hallucination, who refused taking their meds because it “dampened their creativity.” And then died way too early as a result.

Unless we want to go back to the bad old days of throwing people for life into insane asylums when they refuse medication, I don’t know what the answer is here. Many of the mentally ill you see on the streets could be helped with medication, but don’t want to be helped.

6 Likes

I had a brother who had a similar problem. Would not take medication due to side effects.
I often wonder - when the medication worked did the reality of all the lost years set in and become depressingly intolerable?
All his friends had gone to collage, jobs, started families…

2 Likes

I don’t even care if people become homeless entirely because of bad “life choices” they have made. They need food, clothing, and shelter, at a bare minimum. Assistance in getting their lives back on track. Whatever we can do. Some people may stay beyond the reach of any assistance offered, which is very sad. But you don’t give up on homeless people. You just don’t.

4 Likes

Blech, I’d rather eat my toenail trimmings than those turds.

In my neck of the woods the problem is tents and motorhomes.

The “unhoused” took over a public parking lot and the public boat launch as their private marina.
No hyperbole, these folks had RV’s larger than NYC apartments and pleasure craft. They weren’t living on the boats, just parking them there denying the public access.
Any attempt to clear it up was met with apathy by the authorities and activists willing to beat anyone into submission by misquoting Martin Vs Boise.

So if one wants to sleep overnight in public with a blanket I have no problem, but houses on wheels, tents, and illegal shanties are a hard no.

In the bay area this makes me a monster.

1 Like

Given the state of the American body politic these days it can be difficult to impossible to separate intentional snark from perfectly sincere comments that sure read like snark.

Where does case law fit in to your world view?

It would be nice if they spread the suffering around a little, the working class, folks who are working hard and trying to get ahead have the problem placed literally on their door steps. It’s not right.
The problem will take decades to fix, let’s not penalize the folks who are trying to get on the first rung of the economic ladder.

And yes housing first without conditions, pointless to ask folks to get clean before offering shelter.

1 Like

Blue cities in blue states are not above this “solution” either. “Nice” suburbs are the most aggressive about shuffling homeless people off to be somebody else’s problem.

3 Likes

Well, that’s incredibly depressing. Before social security, the elderly had a much higher poverty rate than other demographics. And now we’re going backwards.

3 Likes

Same in NorCal, please don’t let empathy for the homeless turn into callous disregard for those who have to live in the midst of the crisis, not everyone paying rent or mortgage is nimby, folks just want to live in peace and safety.

3 Likes

in terms of age demographics the olds are still the most affluent. I suspect as in every demo the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

1 Like

Uh…then this isn’t really the case since the Grant’s Pass ordinance seems targeted at preventing homeless people, as a class, from sleeping in Grant’s Pass. That is, it is an ordinance that basically makes it illegal to be homeless in Grant’s Pass unless one is a awake at the time. I’m pretty sure that SF isn’t trying to make it illegal to be homeless in SF. So, in the case of the Grant’s Pass ordinance at least, it isn’t about clarifying Robinson at all but about overturning Robinson.

I hope that the morality of the Supreme Court here will allow homeless people to sleep when they’re in public municipal spaces, particularly when they really have little other choice. What is your hope on that?

1 Like

Ironically, that 2025 project would seem to be the exact scenario 2A is supposed to prevent

Liberal Justices Come Out Swinging In Uphill Battle Over Criminalizing Homelessness

Don’t do it, me girls! Never fight uphill, me girls!

2 Likes

I graduated with my BSc in 1977 from a new, little known state college in California.

I couldn’t find a career-job, due to a combination of no network worth talking about outside the academy (new, unknown state college and I was in one of the single-digit graduating classes) and being a young white guy in the emerging world of affirmative action.

It ended up forcing me to make use of the network I did have and leaving California (I thought temporarily but it ended up being permanent) for graduate school. I ended up with a PhD and two careers–one in academics (30 years) and the other in pharma research (six years and counting).

I was tired of going to school. While I did intend to return to graduate school at some point, what I really wanted at that point was to live a not-a-student life. Stagflation, no professional network worth speaking about, and Equal Employment Opportunity ended up dictating otherwise.

In the long run things worked out pretty well for me, but I wondered sometimes while they were working out.

2 Likes

This echoes of cities and towns in the Midwest and West that were posted as Sundown Towns, except that this ordinance targets the homeless rather than POC.

2 Likes

With acknowledgement that @lori4242 has already given the relevant Anatole France quote, here it is again in French, complete with diacritical marks.

La majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.

The quote is from Le Lys Rouge (The Red Lily, an 1894 novel by France.) The passage in the novel is spoken by the character Mr Chouette, an anarchist. He is decrying the militarization of French society which he holds Louis XIV responsible for initiating.

Here is some more context, with the quote in boldface. There is another juicy passage at the end, which I’ve put in italics.

Choulette wanted to express human misery, not simple and touching, as the men of yesteryear had felt it, in a world mixed with harshness and kindness, but hideous and painted, in this state of perfect ugliness where carried by the free-thinking bourgeois and the patriotic soldiers, resulting from the French Revolution. According to him, the current regime was nothing but hypocrisy and brutality. Militarism horrified him.

— The barracks are a hideous invention of modern times. It only dates back to the 17th century . Before, we only had the good guardhouse where the soldiers played cards andtales of Merlusine. Louis XIV is a precursor of the Convention and of Bonaparte. But evil has reached its full extent since the monstrous institution of service for all. To have made it an obligation for men to kill is the shame of emperors and republics, the crime of crimes. In the so-called barbaric ages, cities and princes entrusted their defense to mercenaries who waged war as wise and prudent people; sometimes there were only five or six dead in a big battle. And when the knights went to war, at least they were not forced to do so; they were killed for their pleasure. No doubt they were only good for that. No one, in the time of Saint Louis, would have had the idea of ​​sending a man of knowledge and understanding into battle. Nor were the plowman torn from the soil to be taken to the army. Now, a poor peasant is made a duty to be a soldier. He is exiled from the house whose roof smokes in the golden silence of the evening, from the lush meadows where the oxen graze, from the fields, from the paternal woods; he is taught, in the courtyard of an ugly barracks, to regularly kill men; they threaten him, they insult him, they put him in prison; they tell him that it is an honor, and if he does not want to honor himself in this way, they shoot him. He obeys because heis subject to fear and of all domestic animals the sweetest, the most laughing and the most docile. We are soldiers, in France, and we are citizens. Another reason for pride, than being a citizen! This consists of the poor supporting and preserving the rich in their power and their idleness. They must work there in front of the majestic equality of laws, which prohibits rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging in the streets and stealing bread. This is one of the benefits of the Revolution. As this revolution was carried out by madmen and imbeciles for the benefit of the purchasers of national property and which ultimately only resulted in the enrichment of madré peasants and bourgeois usurers, it rose, under the name of equality, the empire of wealth. She delivered France to the men of money, who for a hundred years have devoured it. They are masters and lords there. The apparent government, made up of pitiful, shabby, stodgy and disastrous poor devils, is in the pay of the financiers. For a hundred years, in this poisoned country, anyone who loves the poor has been considered a traitor to society. And one is a dangerous man when one says that he is miserable. We even made laws against indignation and pity. And what I say here could not be printed.

2 Likes

Some of the Republican gang of six on the Court seem to be taking their inner Marie Antoinette’s out for some air: ‘Oh, if these dirty, smelly homeless people don’t have a primary residence, let them stay at their vacation cottages. After they finish their nutritionally complete dinners, let them eat cake.’

I am shocked but not surprised.

3 Likes