''Martin v. Boise'' (full case nam
''Robert Martin, Lawrence Lee Smith, Robert Anderson, Janet F. Bell, Pamela S. Hawkes, and Basil E. Humphrey v. City of Boise'' was a
2018 decision by the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is the U.S. federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts:
* District ...
in response to a 2009 lawsuit by six
homeless
Homelessness or houselessness – also known as a state of being unhoused or unsheltered – is the condition of lacking stable, safe, and adequate housing. People can be categorized as homeless if they are:
* living on the streets, also kn ...
plaintiffs against the city of
Boise, Idaho regarding the city's anti-camping ordinance. The ruling held that cities cannot enforce anti-
camping ordinances if they do not have enough
homeless shelter
Homeless shelters are a type of homeless service agency which provide temporary residence for homeless individuals and families. Shelters exist to provide residents with safety and protection from exposure to the weather while simultaneously r ...
beds available for their homeless population.
It did not necessarily mean a city cannot enforce ''any'' restrictions on camping on public property.
The decision was based on the
Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution protects against imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. This amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the ...
's prohibition on
cruel and unusual punishment
Cruel and unusual punishment is a phrase in common law describing punishment that is considered unacceptable due to the suffering, pain, or humiliation it inflicts on the person subjected to the sanction. The precise definition varies by jurisd ...
.
In 2019, the
U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case, leaving the precedent intact in the nine Western states under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit (
Alaska,
Arizona,
California,
Hawaii,
Idaho,
Montana,
Nevada,
Oregon, and
Washington).
History
In 2009, after a local homeless shelter in Boise closed, six people were cited for violations of a city ordinance that makes it illegal to sleep on public property. One of those people, Robert Martin, along with the others, represented by Howard Belodoff, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance that punishes someone for sleeping outside when they have nowhere else to go.
In 2021, the city settled the lawsuit by agreeing to spend $1.3 million for additional shelter spaces, $435,000 for the plaintiffs' attorneys fees, and agreed to amend ordinances on public sleeping as well as to train their police not to arrest people or issue citations when there is no shelter space available. People who are offered appropriate available shelter space, but refuse to go could still be cited, under the settlement.
Current interpretation
The ruling leaves undecided the issue of whether it is legal to set limits on ''which'' public properties and during what hours camping or sleeping can be prohibited; the city of Sacramento, for example, allows sleeping on the City Hall grounds at night but not during the day, and this arrangement is not explicitly banned by the ruling.
References
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cases
Homelessness in the United States
2018 in United States case law
{{US-case-law-stub