US cities are grappling with a quickly changing landscape in how to respond to a worsening homelessness crisis, following a groundbreaking supreme court decision in June and ahead of Donald Trump’s return to the White House this month.
Proponents of more punitive options are feeling emboldened, as cities from Phoenix in Arizona to Fort Lauderdale in Florida step up enforcement even as others such as Philadelphia and Providence, Rhode Island, consider new protections.
Known as the Grants Pass decision, the June supreme court ruling gives local officials new powers to criminalise sleeping in public, even if adequate shelter space is not available.
In the aftermath of the Grants Pass decision and ahead of Trump’s second administration, which begins on January 20th, interest from local officials in anti-camping and related policies has skyrocketed.
Justin Trudeau promised ‘sunny ways’ but could not fulfil his lofty ambitions
Trump comes full circle as Washington marks anniversary of Capitol riot
Elon Musk fights Battle of Britain on two fronts as he clashes with Nigel Farage and Keir Starmer
Lebanon ceasefire: Fog of war enables claim and counter-claim to retard progress
“I can’t think of a state that’s not interested in working on this,” said Devon M Kurtz, public safety policy director with the Cicero Institute, a conservative think tank that has spearheaded anti-camping laws in multiple states.
“The demand is infinite. I have quadrupled my team in the last year, and I can’t keep up with the demand.”
In Oklahoma City, city councillor JoBeth Hamon said she was “nervous” about the impact of the supreme court ruling, even though the city had been taking new steps in recent years to get more homeless people into housing.
“I’ve heard from council members that we also need a stick – punishment or criminalisation or accountability,” said Ms Hamon.
In Rhode Island, municipalities had introduced policies to fine or ticket someone for sleeping outside on public property, said Miguel Sanchez, a city councillor in Providence.
While Providence’s mayor has not planned to follow suit, Mr Sanchez is seeking more permanent safeguards, and in November proposed barring such penalties.
“This is a very bare minimum, but it also adds an extra layer of protection,” he said, noting such local actions were taking on additional importance with Donald Trump’s re-election.
“All politics are local ... and that sentiment will become all the more important right now,” said Mr Sanchez.
Mr Trump’s transition team did not respond to a request for comment, but during the campaign he promised to “use every tool, lever and authority to get the homeless off our streets”.
Since the supreme court’s decision, more than 90 local Bills had been passed and another 65 were pending to punish people for sleeping outside, said Jesse Rabinowitz, campaign and communications director with the non-profit National Homelessness Law Center.
Another 20 cities and states have moved in the opposite direction, saying they will not mete out such punishments.
“What we feared would happen is happening across the country,” Mr Rabinowitz said. “Cities are moving very quickly to pass laws that make homelessness worse.”
US homelessness has surged following the pandemic. It reached more than 770,000 people in January 2024, up 18 per cent from 2023, according to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Those numbers have worsened with the end of pandemic-related aid, but are driven by a lack of affordable housing across the country, exacerbated by rising inflation and stagnating wages.
The Grants Pass decision reversed a lower court's ruling that said local jurisdictions were not allowed to ban rough sleeping if they did not have enough shelter beds available.
That earlier ruling had hamstrung local governments’ response, said Stephanie Martinez-Ruckman, a legislative director with the National League of Cities, an umbrella group that filed a brief in the Grants Pass case that was cited extensively by the justices.
“The issue was local control,” she said. “Having all of those tools in the toolbox and having that flexibility is important going forward.”
NLC, an organisation focused on improving urban quality of life, has said that the best way to end homelessness is to ensure that all individuals have access to stable affordable housing – meaning more affordable homes, making land available for new housing development, and so on.
While cities and counties have increasingly put their own money into addressing homelessness, the federal government continues to fund a major portion of the response with $3.5 billion (€3.39 billion) spent last year.
That has come with too much federal influence, said Mr Kurtz from the Cicero Institute.
Mr Kurtz said past policies had been too careful to not be coercive, while the reality was that unsheltered homelessness was a danger and health risk, both for homeless individuals and communities at large.
Current federal officials urge restraint.
“During this time of change, it is important to focus on what matters most – getting people off the streets,” said Jeff Olivet, executive director of the US Interagency Council on Homelessness.
“Criminalisation of homelessness is expensive, ineffective and inhumane. Instead of arrests and fines, we need to prevent people from losing their homes in the first place. True solutions to homelessness are housing and services like healthcare and mental health treatment,” he said.
Scott Turner, Mr Trump’s pick to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was a key figure during his first administration in implementing the “Opportunity Zones” tax incentives for private investment in marginalised communities.
This background has sparked concern that if Mr Turner were to be confirmed as housing secretary, he would prioritise the private sector in addressing the housing crisis.
Cities will still have options to push back and define their approach according to local voter needs and interests, despite the supreme court decision and fears the incoming administration will take a punitive approach to address homelessness.
Alongside the presidential election, voters in St Louis in Missouri, Orleans Parish in Louisiana and Charlotte in North Carolina, among others, also backed measures to boost housing affordability.
“It’s heartening to see these ballot measures get approved,” said D’Ana Pennington, a programme director with Local Progress, an umbrella group of local elected officials.
In New York City, lawmakers last year mandated new transparency in how and when city “sweeps” forcibly remove people from encampments, along with tracking what happens to residents afterwards.
The first ever law is sparking similar efforts in Minneapolis.
“We’re in a very slippery place now,” said New York City council member Sandy Nurse, who sponsored the legislation. “Grants Pass gave license to the city to continue using sweeps as a tactic, rather than recognising the human rights of individuals and the need for us to provide housing.”
Small, rural Meadville, Pennsylvania, has also seen an uptick in unsheltered homeless people, and this year started a new response: a single hub and phone number that residents can call if they think someone needs help.
“You can call, and they’ll have people go out and create relationships with those people,” said mayor Jaime Kinder.
Ms Kinder sees the programme as assurance that city policies on homelessness remain humane. “We’re not arresting someone for being unhoused,” she said.
The effort has helped reduce the number of rough sleepers from 12 in June to two in recent weeks, said Lynn McUmber, executive director of the Crawford County Mental Health Awareness Program, the point agency on the new effort.
“The only way it works is to work with people one on one,” she said.
“We have to find a way and the resources to get out there and start to truly build those relationships, to help one person at a time get through it.” – Thomson Reuters Foundation