HARRISBURG, Pa. — In a major decision, the Supreme Court made its ruling in the Grants Pass v. Johnson case.
The court's conservative-leaning justices voted in favor of the small Oregon town for enforcing camping bans on public grounds. The encampment bans have been used to target the homeless population living in Grant Pass.
Dickinson College president John Jones, who is a former federal judge, said the justices had to answer whether these encampment bans violate the Constitution.
“The contention was that because it called for fines and 30-day imprisonment for repeat offenses that violated the 8th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment," said Jones.
In the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that homelessness is a complex issue with many causes. However, he argued that the 8th Amendment does not give federal judges the job of, "assessing those causes [of homelessness] and devising those responses.
“What this gives municipalities license to do is to criminalize, under certain circumstances, sleeping on public property," said Jones.
Aisha Mobley, who is an advocate for people struggling with homelessness in Harrisburg, believes the ruling would allow people to be moved and punished for sleeping outside, without giving them a place to go.
“Where are they going to go? And what is the answer?" asked Mobley. “Our shelters are full; Bethesda has been full all summer. I just talked with one of their representatives and they’re full. They say as soon as somebody walks out, somebody’s literally outside waiting to walk back in.”
Mobley said hundreds of people currently live in an encampment outside of the PennDOT Building on Front Street. The City of Harrisburg is planning on clearing out the area sometime next year to make way for the I-83 expansion project.
She said city, county, and state leaders need to come together to help those in need.
“I just hope people start to put some pressure on our officials to get more boots on the ground to get our people moved and housed and provide continued services," said Mobley.
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Sotomayor argued that encampment laws punish people who are homeless and don't always have control over their situation. She added that amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.