Homelessness is a crime. Suck it up.
If we have food and clothing, we will be content with these. –Timothy 6:8
Grants Pass v. Johnson
When I see Tony on the streets on Saturday mornings, he is in one of two personality modes: engaged or suicidal.
He wears his trucker baseball cap, his thick, almost mullet-style hair escaping behind it, his hands in his pockets as he drifts along the sidewalks of Woodruff Park in downtown Atlanta.
I usually sit in my car and look for him, reading his body language first, but mostly to see that he is still here. If he is engaged — eagerly helping volunteer vendors set up their tables — I know he is on his meds and would talk to me today about the best rock and roll guitarists, drummers, and vocalists.
The man is a rock and roll encyclopedia who loves sharing his knowledge. And like everyone I meet on the streets, what they crave more than food is conversation.
They want to tell their stories and they want someone to listen.
If his shoulders slumped forward and his gaze stayed on the street, I knew he was unmedicated, that once again he could not get the drugs he required. He’ll barely look at me and mumble things like, ‘You won’t see me again,’ and, ‘I’ll just do it. Take a shiv and cut my throat.’
Tony is one of the thousands of homeless living on the streets of Atlanta, a city where 52.7 per 100,000 people are shelterless. While that’s a relatively low number compared to San Jose, California, where 637 per 100,000 are living in tents, the issue remains, just like in states throughout the country.
In 2023, the US recorded the highest number of homeless people since 2007. 653,104 people live on the streets. That’s almost an 11% increase from 2022.
The recent Supreme Court ruling on homelessness — specifically the case of Grants Pass v. Johnson — has egregious implications for how cities across the United States criminalize homelessness.
Yes, you read that correctly. Criminalize humans because they have no ability — or rather, support of municipalities — to be fed, housed, and clothed — fundamental human rights.
The ruling upheld mandates of cities to enforce ordinances that penalize “certain behaviors” associated with homelessness.
And what are such behaviors? Sleeping in tents under highway overpasses, sleeping on park benches, asking for food or clothing — all because they have nowhere to go.
Let’s be clear. The Supreme Court decision, as if to justify its actions, emphasizes the distinction between cities punishing a status (being homeless) versus punishing unlawful “certain behaviors” (sleeping or camping in public).
If there is any redemption in the decision, it is that the ruling spotlights the challenges cities face in balancing enforcement — with little adequate support and services for the homeless population.
The United Nations — Article 25
Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”
Homelessness is a moral outrage and a violation of a human right.
Legal rights are merely a social construct of what our society is willing to create to defend beliefs — and laws regarding these rights should be defended — like the right to an adequate standard of living.
The Homeless Conundrum
Despite having the resources to tackle homelessness, it persists across the United States (and in other countries) as a global human rights violation.
This issue escapes human rights accountability and is rarely treated as a violation demanding proactive measures from states to prevent it.
Cities were already struggling to deal with the issue of homelessness — and with the chaotic real estate market (and lack of affordable housing) — the new ruling only throws glass in the eyes of homeless advocates.
Cities like Atlanta, which are band-aiding homeless encampments by forcing them to move from place to place, now have the legal mandates to enforce fines and jail time for those unable to find shelter — shelter in “legal” parameters as calculated by the city — which criminalizes the homeless.
The catch-22 in all of this mess is that criminalizing unsheltered humans makes it even more difficult for them to find stable housing (or employment) because of negative divots on their credit scores and criminal records.
For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me. — MATTHEW 25:31–40
Now more than ever we need comprehensive strategies with collaboration between local governments and community organizations to address the root causes of homelessness, such as affordable housing shortages and lack of access to mental health and addiction services.
My friend Tony, at the very least, should be able to get his monthly medications to maintain a job.
So how do we do that now?
Timothy 6:8
Skyrocketing rents, lack of affordable housing, low wages, and decades of ineffective housing policies have exacerbated homelessness.
Rather than addressing the root causes by creating rental assistance and eviction prevention, cities scramble blindly to save tourism by moving the homeless away from popular downtown areas.
It’s understood that tourism in any city is vital to its ability to bring in foreign currencies — and few enjoy taking subways or visiting attractions with people sleeping in doorways, on sidewalks, or using the sides of buildings as a latrine.
Shooing them away, imposing fines, or arresting them, however, does not solve the issue.
And the real solution isn’t found in courtrooms or jails or fines — but in providing immediate accessible housing and essential services.
Essential. As in Timothy 6:8. Food. Clothing.
Empowering people to find work, find housing, to live.
There are mounds and volumes of evidence showing that having an unpaid citation and a warrant out for arrest, let alone in incarceration, prevents people from accessing housing, jobs in other places. — Chris Herring, assistant professor of sociology at the University of California
My friend Tony, who has existed on the streets for years, often tells me he does not want to be homeless. He does not want to be mentally ill, but he is.
And he cannot sustain living with bipolar disorder without the medication he needs to stabilize. He should not have to fight state red tape to get his medications.
Someone once said to me, “Why don’t you just hand out twenties on the Marta? They need to just get jobs.”
Of course, handing out money isn’t realistic — free money for all is not what this is about — and I agree, they should be working.
But they need support to be able to find work.
Homelessness is a profound assault on dignity, social inclusion and the right to life. It is a prima facie violation of the right to housing and violates a number of other human rights in addition to the right to life, including non-discrimination, health, water and sanitation, security of the person and freedom from cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment. — Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing (A/HRC/43/43, para.30)
Eliminate Band-Aid Strategies by Empowering Innovation
Addressing homelessness is a complex issue — the Supreme Court ruling makes it more so. But logic dictates that only a multifaceted approach, with long-term thinking, can work.
Instead of policing homelessness, let’s be proactive and pass research-based policies that work.
We can look at other states and see four ingenuities that are partially successful.
Houston, Texas adopted the Housing First Approach that emphasizes permanent housing to homeless individuals as quickly as possible, without preconditions such as sobriety or employment.
The program reduced its homeless population by 54% between 2011 and 2019. Other states followed.
Salt Lake City, Utah reduced chronic homelessness by 91% since 2005.
Finland, the only country where homelessness declined, did so by implementing a Housing First policy.
Combining housing with supportive services helps address the elephant in the room — mental illness and substance abuse. Like Tony, who blames his homelessness on his past substance abuse (and mental illness), many homeless people suffer from one or both.
Supportive services include mental health counseling, substance abuse treatment, and employment training. All of these services help get people off the streets and employed.
Increasing the supply of affordable housing is crucial to preventing homelessness.
This is achieved, partially, through state-supported subsidies for low-income housing.
Yet we also must give incentives for developers to consider affordable housing projects along with their high-earning developments (and yes, zoning reforms must be implemented to allow more housing types).
While other multiple strategies involving government, local communities, and legal assistance must also play a part in changing homelessness, cities are exploring innovative approaches to conquer homelessness.
Small houses, microarchitecture, empty shipping containers, and cost-effective housing are at play — and yes, even 3D printing.
Addressing homelessness requires a combination of immediate relief efforts, preventive measures, and long-term solutions.
And it can be done.
By implementing a comprehensive approach that includes housing, supportive services, and policy advocacy, communities can make significant strides in reducing — and ultimately ending — homelessness.
When I approach Tony on a recent bright, sunny Saturday, he’s asking if he can help move tables, a good sign.
“Did you hear Bon Jovi has a new record?” I say.
He grins and puts his hands in his pockets. “Shit. Richie Sambora was the best damn guitarist for them,” he says. “But he done had the rehab. That done him in musically, but it saved him.”
Comments