news San Francisco Mayor London Breed announces city will prosecute homelessness

[jakeisphat]

 

Quote

 

After a landmark Supreme Court decision on homelessness, Mayor London Breed said Friday that the city will take a harder line on homeless encampments. 

 

The Supreme Court's decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson, which determined that cities can enforce bans on public camping even if no alternative shelter is available, laid the groundwork for cities to enact stricter policies on homeless encampments. At a City Hall press conference, Breed told reporters that the city could issue citations and escalating penalties towards people who refuse shelter. 

 

"We'll be able to impose citations. We'll be able to impose penalties. And things can be aggressively worse as time goes on, in terms of when we're offering services, we can impose some significant penalties," Breed said. 

 

When asked whether someone could go to jail for refusing services, Breed responded, "We are having discussions about what that would entail right now."

 

In a 6-3 decision, justices overturned a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that had barred the Oregon city of Grants Pass from enforcing public camping laws, which advocates argued violated the Eighth Amendment's "cruel and unusual punishment" clause.

 

In San Francisco, the Supreme Court decision could drastically alter a separate lawsuit filed by the Coalition on Homelessness in 2022 that resulted in a federal injunction restricting the city from sweeping homeless encampments. Currently, city workers involved in sweeps must determine whether an individual is "involuntarily homeless." 

 

The mayor said she was comfortable siding with the six conservative justices on the matter of encampments, which have bedeviled officials in San Francisco and other West Coast cities for years. City Attorney David Chiu, Gov. Gavin Newsom and others had filed briefs with the Supreme Court arguing that the Ninth Circuit precedent on public camping had tied cities' hands in addressing homelessness. 

 

"That's how you get things done," Breed said about agreeing with the conservative jurists. "I don't shut anybody out."

Breed and Chiu said Friday that it will take time to interpret the Supreme Court's decision and how, specifically, the city will change its policies regarding encampments. Both asserted the city will continue to take a "services-first" approach whereby individuals are offered shelter or other assistance, though it remains to be seen what role police may play in encampment sweeps moving forward. Officials also said Friday that it would take time to train outreach teams with the new rules.

 

In January 2023, San Francisco police issued a bulletin guiding officers on enforcing the law around encampments after the federal injunction barred the city from enforcing, or even threatening to enforce, laws that "prohibit homeless individuals from sitting, lying or sleeping on public property."

 

"Under the injunction, members may still ask individuals who are experiencing homelessness to relocate voluntarily, so long as the City's request is not accompanied with a threat of enforcement, or any language mentioning those statutes that could reasonably be interpreted as a threat to enforce any of the above listed laws," the bulletin said.

 

Now, the City Attorney's Office plans to advise the police department that the Supreme Court ruling allows them to enforce the laws the injunction ruled it could not. 

 

On Friday, homeless advocates voiced concern that the Supreme Court ruling criminalizes poverty, forcing homeless people into the criminal justice system and making it more difficult to regain stability. 

 

Dr. Margot Kushel, a professor of medicine at UCSF and director of the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative, called the Supreme Court's ruling "really extreme."

 

"This is going to significantly worsen the challenges that people face in regaining housing," she said in an interview. "I worry [the city is] just going to fill our jails. And it is not going to get us any closer to the solution that everyone in San Francisco wants."

 

Data shows that San Francisco police use force disproportionately against homeless people compared to the general population. Nearly a third of subjects in use-of-force incidents are homeless, a Standard data analysis found. 

 

"San Francisco should not interpret this ruling as a green light to unlawfully crack down on unhoused residents simply for being unable to afford housing, and instead must commit to moving more people off the streets and into affordable housing or emergency shelter," said John Do, a senior attorney at the ACLU of Northern California, which argues on behalf of homeless advocates.

 

 

 

https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/28/grants-pass-san-francisco-homeless-london-breed/

[Heldenzeit]

London breed? Well lemme go there next vacation 

[Tcharm]

This mayor being one of the first ones to act huh. I know this wench sees all the $$ in imprisoning more homeless for private and state prison labor esp with Cali's inflated homeless population. 

 

God Bless Murica home of the wage and prison slaves. 

[Komet]

 Yeah because this is how you solve homelessness. A terrifying decision by the so called supreme court in the first place.

[Likingstars]

Of al places im kinda surprised and also nit so surprised that SF is the first city to act on this hmmm

[Lost In Paradise]

plenty of alternative shelter IS available, but they have to get off the drugs to stay!

[Delirious]

Maybe firstly act on persecuting burglars in SF instead of the homeless??? Lol

[Lost In Paradise]

1 minute ago, Delirious said:

Maybe firstly act on persecuting burglars in SF instead of the homeless??? Lol

oh she's coming after them too!

 

https://www.sf.gov/news/san-francisco-2024-crime-rates-down-city-prepares-implement-new-voter-approved-public-safety

[Delirious]

Just now, Lost In Paradise said:

oh she's coming after them too!

 

https://www.sf.gov/news/san-francisco-2024-crime-rates-down-city-prepares-implement-new-voter-approved-public-safety

Oh thank God.

 

Literally arrived to SF a few days ago and someone said they got their phone stolen in the middle of the city in the afternoon like....💀

[Lost In Paradise]

Just now, Delirious said:

Oh thank God.

 

Literally arrived to SF a few days ago and someone said they got their phone stolen in the middle of the city in the afternoon like....💀

welcome! Hope you enjoy Pride this weekend 

 

parts of the city have not improved at all (mainly around the Pride festival in civic center tomorrow) so definitely be vigilant with your body and belongings

 

but there's still so much to love if you have time to check out other areas

[Delirious]

13 minutes ago, Lost In Paradise said:

welcome! Hope you enjoy Pride this weekend 

 

parts of the city have not improved at all (mainly around the Pride festival in civic center tomorrow) so definitely be vigilant with your body and belongings

 

but there's still so much to love if you have time to check out other areas

Thank you! 

 

Can't wait to visit Chinatown and Japan town 

[qurl]

the way this was all a ploy to get more prison (aka slave) labor and continued revenue for the for-profit private prison systems …… and they're not even trying to hide it

[Contessa]

37 minutes ago, Lost In Paradise said:

plenty of alternative shelter IS available, but they have to get off the drugs to stay!

Are they offering rehabilitation programs for them or just setting a hardline of drug/no drug and keeping them out?

[Lost In Paradise]

10 minutes ago, qurl said:

the way this was all a ploy to get more prison (aka slave) labor and continued revenue for the for-profit private prison systems …… and they're not even trying to hide it

on the national level, probably. but in SF we just want to be able to walk safely again  it's an out of control, complicated issue here

[Pavement Princess]

IDK, it really is such a  tricky issue and of course you want to protect the livelihood of everyone but San Francisco is a wasteland. I went back a few times this year after not having been home in years and it was unrecognizable and frankly scary. At a certain point the city itself and the people who actively work and live in SF need to be valued over the overbearing protection of homeless people (specifically those who choose to do so) and I can only hope they figure out the most humane ways to accomplish that!

[qurl]

44 minutes ago, Lost In Paradise said:

on the national level, probably. but in SF we just want to be able to walk safely again  it's an out of control, complicated issue here

homelessness should not be criminalized full stop. you are mad at the wrong people. you should be mad at the people hoarding wealth when basically 100 individual people in this country could end homelessness and hunger here if they were taxed effectively or elected to donate a lot of their money that they don't even need! maybe some people want to live more transient lifestyles and don't want to be in shelters but there are so many other programs and things that could be done if we had less million/billionaires in this country (and mind you those people would still be ultra wealthy and get to live very, very well).

 

i can't entertain any argument where the crux is "ya but our city has a REAL problem with homelessness". no our COUNTRY has a real problem where a lot of "normal" people are one bad paycheck away from being homeless and a handful of thousands of people have more f*cking money that they can even spend or know what to do with. this is not a hard concept to grasp.

[Communion]

Sending rich people to re-education centers to break up rocks is apparently authoritarian yet capitalist Americans love sending poor peopoe to jail for literally the crime of being poor. 

[dawnettakins]

It's a very tricky, gray issue. Public spaces are supposed to be public, they're not for anyone to just live if they choose. At the same time, "prosecuting" homeless for existing and having no where to go is problematic.

 

The homeless should have somewhere to go though, and cities should be providing that. Especially since they have the right to move them out.

 

I was in SF last September and it was chilling. Needles out everywhere, tent encampments with homeless people doing drugs out in the open. It was NOT okay. Portland was the same.

 

The city just felt completely unsafe, not to mention all the crime. They must do something, and if they have the proper beds and places to move them to, then I believe they should have the right to for public safety and making the city welcoming again. Prosecuting them is taking it a little far though.

Edited June 29 by dawnettakins

[Communion]

1 hour ago, Lost In Paradise said:

on the national level, probably. but in SF we just want to be able to walk safely again  it's an out of control, complicated issue here

I genuinely need you to understand there is no sympathy for uppity metro six-figure making tech ghouls and culturistas being scared of poor people that they've displaced. 

 

Literally prosecuting people for being homeless isn't about "we just want to feel safe" when you're creating a new modern form of slave labor.

 

It's insidious because those who leave prison are already more likely to struggle to find housing, quickly get a job, etc. So if you leave prison after serving your time for the crime of... being homeless, and you get out, and go back to being homeless.. you'll just go back to prison in an never-ending cycle? 

Edited June 29 by Communion

[Cain]

Imprisoning people for being homeless is CRAZY  like that's literally on you, you did this

[Attitude]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

I genuinely need you to understand there is no sympathy for uppity metro six-figure making tech ghouls and culturistas being scared of poor people that they've displaced. 

 

Literally prosecuting people for being homeless isn't about "we just want to feel safe" when you're creating a new modern form of slave labor.

 

It's insidious because those who leave prison are already more likely to struggle to find housing, quickly get a job, etc. So if you leave prison after serving your time for the crime of... being homeless, and you get out, and go back to being homeless.. you'll just go back to prison in an never-ending cycle? 

This. I live in San Diego and there's definitely been a rise in homelessness since people from the Bay started moving here. Rent and home prices have become ridiculous and there's a lot of properties just sitting empty because they buy them for short term rentals. 

[beautiful player]

Difficult but necessary step. Though, some users in this thread should take a closer look at the content of the OP. Not all homeless people are being sent to jail, instead penalties are imposed for individuals refusing shelter and assistance. Seems fair to me. 

[Communion]

1 hour ago, beautiful player said:

Difficult but necessary step. Though, some users in this thread should take a closer look at the content of the OP. Not all homeless people are being sent to jail, instead penalties are imposed for individuals refusing shelter and assistance. Seems fair to me. 

"It's reasonable to make people's choices be institutionalization for struggling with drug addiction or prison" 

 

Genuinely curious the motivations of someone to pretend to be some liberal centrist after being permabanned for their far-right views. 

 

Continually perplexed by users stripping their profile of demographic information (despite a decade of posts sharing said demographics like race, age, ethnicity, nationality, etc.) to try to appear as something else to those who don't know better.

 

It really has nothing to do with you not being American but this trend of users being like "Oh? Right-wing Dems are criminalizing homelessness? Good, we need to keep our streets clean even if the loony left don't like it " and it's like.. OUR STREETS? Limburg isn't a US city? 

Edited June 29 by Communion

[bad guy]

Last time I was there it was a ghost town. It wasn't so much the homeless people that were an issue but the very loud, vocal, and aggressive drug addicts/mentally ill people just wandering around like zombies. Homelessness is a huge issue but I think getting the dangerous people off the streets is more important than targeting all homeless people. Tech nerds ruined a once beautiful city.

[on the line]

3 hours ago, Komet said:

 Yeah because this is how you solve homelessness. A terrifying decision by the so called supreme court in the first place.

there's no solving homelessness when so many people refuse services. i'm definitely liberal but living surrounded by this mess is the one thing that makes me conservative. something needs to be done bc what's happening now since covid is not sustainable or livable for anyone.