The Brief

The U.S. Supreme Court is about to hear the biggest case about homelessness in decades, and it seems like everyone in California has an opinion.

At issue: Whether and under what conditions cities can fine or arrest people for camping in public spaces. The ruling will have nationwide implications for how local leaders manage homeless encampments.

Where does Gov. Gavin Newsom stand on that issue? What about the leaders of California’s major cities? Our law enforcement agencies? Homelessness experts? How about President Joe Biden’s administration?

Good questions! The good news is we can actually answer that. Many people and organizations have filed amicus briefs to the Supreme Court for the case, which means they’ve written out their opinion and submitted it in writing to the Justices for them to consider.

Read on to find out where many of the most important stakeholders in the homelessness crisis stand on homeless encampments.

What’s at stake in these Supreme Court arguments

The case, Johnson v. Grants Pass, stems from a 2018 lawsuit challenging an ordinance approved by the small city in Southern Oregon that essentially made it illegal for homeless residents to camp on all public property throughout the city.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Monday, to determine if the ordinance violates the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment to penalize someone for camping if they have nowhere else to go.

“This is the most important Supreme Court case about homelessness in at least 40 years, and the results will be tremendous,” Jesse Rabinowitz, communications and campaign director of the National Homelessness Law Center, said during a media call.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals already has ruled in the Grants Pass case, and in a prior case (Martin v. Boise) that cities cannot punish someone for camping if that person has no other shelter. Grants Pass has asked the Supreme Court to overturn both prior rulings.

Since the Ninth Circuit first weighed in, numerous California cities have been sued over their efforts to remove homeless camps. Judges have delayed or halted efforts in several places, including San Francisco, Sacramento, Chico and San Rafael. On Tuesday, California Democrats voted to kill a bill that would have prohibited encampments near schools and other areas statewide.

More than three dozen elected officials and organizations have weighed in on the Grants Pass case.

Taking the pro-enforcement side

Those on this side argue that by restricting the enforcement of anti-camping ordinances, the courts have made it impossible for cities to lessen the harm encampments do to neighborhoods. They also argue the prior rulings — which they want overturned — are confusing and too hard to follow.

• California State Sheriffs’ Association and California Police Chiefs Association: Local governments now have little or no power to enforce rules when it comes to homeless residents, “leading to an explosion of encampments throughout the state of California.”
   
• California State Association of Counties and League of California Cities: The courts have become “micromanagers” of homelessness policy. Those decisions instead should be left up to cities and counties.
  
• California Republican Reps. Kevin Kiley of Rocklin, Doug LaMalfa of Yuba City, Tom McClintock of El Dorado Hills, Jay Obernolte of Hesperla and Darrell Issa of Temecula: “Statistics demonstrate that homeless encampments and crime go hand-in-hand,” and therefore the Ninth Circuit rulings have made it practically impossible for cities to combat crime.
  
• Venice Stakeholders Association: The rulings have created an “extreme imbalance between the rights of the homeless and those of Venice’s residents and business owners” who have to deal with encampments near their homes and businesses. 
  
• Office of the San Diego County District Attorney: San Diego recently passed an ordinance banning homeless encampments near schools, shelters and transit hubs and in parks, and, if shelter is available, on public sidewalks. The recent Ninth Circuit rulings “create uncertainty about the validity of the ordinance as a whole.” 
  
• California Chamber of Commerce: Employers have trouble hiring and keeping employees, and attracting customers, when their business is near a homeless encampment.
  
• Cicero Institute: The Cicero Institute, a public policy organization, drafted model anti-camping legislation that has been adopted in states including Texas and Utah. “Several jurisdictions have made great progress by enforcing public camping bans.”

Siding with homeless residents: Banning camping is inhumane

These groups and individuals support court rulings that limit enforcement of anti-camping ordinances. They argue punishing someone for camping when there isn’t enough shelter available — as is the case in most California cities — is wrong.

• California Democratic Reps. Ro Khanna of Fremont, Barbara Lee of Oakland and Linda Sanchez of Whittier: “Punishing human beings for existing when they have nowhere safe to rest is not only unconstitutional, it is also the least effective and most costly response a city can choose.”
  
• American Psychiatric Association and the National Alliance on Mental Illness: For unhoused people with severe mental illness, being approached by police for violating a camping ban could turn into a deadly altercation. People with untreated mental illness are 16 times more likely to be killed by law enforcement than those without a mental illness.
  
• National Homelessness Law Center: The Grants Pass ordinance is just as morally and legally wrong as Jim Crow Laws and “anti-Okie” laws that discriminated against refugees migrating into California during the Dust Bowl.
  
• 57 social scientists who have published research on homelessness: Research shows that punishing people for camping negatively impacts their physical and mental health, exacerbates the spread of disease and prolongs homelessness by making it harder for them to get out of debt, find jobs and access housing and other services.
  
• American Civil Liberties Union: The Grants Pass ordinance punishes people for “unavoidable, life-sustaining, and fundamentally human acts.”
  
• National Coalition of Men: The court should consider whether Grants Pass is discriminating against a protected class by targeting unsheltered homeless people in its anti-camping ordinance.
  

Taking neither side: A middle-of-the-road approach

Homelessness policy is a hyper-emotional, intensely polarizing issue, and by siding with neither party in the Grants Pass case, those in this group are attempting to occupy the political middle-ground. They don’t want to be seen as supporters of “criminalizing homelessness.” But they also don’t want to be seen as too soft on enforcement.

They say it’s wrong to prohibit camping everywhere in a city if a person has nowhere else to sleep. But they also want cities to have more freedom to clear camps and enforce camping bans.

• Gov. Gavin Newsom: Local courts are blocking “common-sense” efforts to clear encampments. “There is no compassion in stepping over people in the streets, and there is no dignity in allowing people to die in dangerous, fire-prone encampments. Hindering cities’ efforts to help their unhoused populations is as inhumane as it is unworkable.”
  
• City of Los Angeles: “The city does not support efforts to criminalize people who are experiencing involuntary homelessness. However, the City does have a paramount interest in its ability to protect public health and safety.”
  
• City of San Francisco and Mayor London Breed: The Supreme Court should not allow cities to ban camping everywhere, at all times, in all public spaces. “Doing so could not only be cruel and unusual, but it would also create perverse incentives to force unhoused individuals to migrate to jurisdictions like San Francisco that do not do so.” San Francisco is currently under a court order that prevents the city from enforcing its anti-camping ordinances.
  
• President Joe Biden’s administration: A person should not be criminalized because they are homeless. But “broad and burdensome” injunctions issued by some district courts limit cities’ abilities to respond to encampments.

Californians will decide on more than a dozen ballot initiatives this November, covering a wide range of proposals focused on housing, taxes, recall elections, voter identification and more.

One ballot measure would approve an $11.25 billion bond for affordable housing; another would create a new down payment assistance program for homebuyers. Proposition 40 would establish a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of billionaires in California, while two other propositions would limit new taxes and potentially nullify Prop. 40. Other ballot measures, if approved, would change the recall election process in California, require identification to vote and speed up the environmental review process for certain developments.

It’s a lot of information to wade through on your own.

That’s why LAist unveils its Voter Game Plan each election season, with guides to help you cast a ballot that aligns with your values and beliefs. (The one thing we don’t do? Tell you how to vote. That is up to you.) For the Nov. 3 general election, LAist is also hosting a series of ballot cram sessions focused on helping you make informed decisions.

The series kicked off on Wednesday with AirTalk Host Larry Mantle and a panel of experts focused on the long list of statewide propositions in a one-hour cram session.

Michael Alvarez, professor of political and computational social science at CalTech; Sara Sadhwani, associate professor of politics at Pomona College, and Lee E. Ohanian, a professor of economics at UCLA and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, provided an overview of each ballot measure. The trio described the pros, cons and stakes of every decision Californians face this November, including the confusing and conflicting trio of tax measures you’ll see on your ballot as Props. 40, 41 and 42.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty as to how much revenue this might generate. There’s a lot of uncertainty, in particular, if it’s going to generate revenue in sufficient time to help the Californians who are really in need of having healthcare,” said Alvarez on Prop. 40, which would create a one-time tax on billionaires to fund healthcare.

Lee and Sadhwani both noted that there's a question of whether the tax would drive billionaires out of the state. “If you think that super high wealthy people should be paying more in taxes, there’s better ways to do this,” said Lee.

As for Prop. 41, which would require audits of new tax programs, and Prop. 42, which would ban new taxes on personal property, the panel agreed the measures are confusing.

Both propositions would nullify Prop. 40 if they receive more votes in support than the billionaire tax measure. That’s the big thing to remember, said Sadhwani: “They’re really the poison pills of Prop. 40, the billionaire’s tax. So a yes on 41 or a yes on 42 is a no essentially for Prop. 40.”

“I’ll be honest, Prop. 41 as well as Prop. 42 kind of makes my eyes glaze over,” said Sadhwani. Alvarez added that the measures make his head spin. Experts — they’re just like us!

LAist’s upcoming voter cram sessions will focus on judicial elections and Orange County.

You can find LAist’s Voter Game Plan and dozens of guides to the Nov. 3 election here at LAist.com/Vote

Elevated sea levels are already rolling into Southern California waters, leading to coastal erosion and other damage. An El Niño-driven Kelvin wave is further exacerbating conditions along the coast. And Tropical Storm Rachel could bring rain across the region this weekend.

But all of this is probably just the beginning of a very wet Southern California rainy season.

Authorities have been sounding the alarm.

“ Residents need to hear this information, and they need to hear it repeatedly, enough times so that they too can act,” L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis said during a recent presentation about El Niño preparations.

Heavy rain, flooding and debris flows can pose serious threats to homes and infrastructure. Officials and climate scientists say the best way to protect yourself and your property is to make preparations now, well before peak El Niño conditions arrive.

Here’s what you can do to prepare your home.

Preparing your property

One of the first steps to getting your home ready for El Niño is to understand how vulnerable it is to flooding when heavy rain or surging surf hits your neighborhood.

“It really is incumbent upon people to pause, evaluate where they live, where they travel and to really think about what would happen if those areas were flooded out,” said Kerjon Lee, spokesperson for the L.A. County Department of Public Works. “ Knowing your community, your neighborhood, where mud and debris flow might occur — is really critical.”

You can review your risks using California’s MyHazard tool, which allows you to input your address and cycle through potential risks.

Floodwaters and the landscape

Knowing if your property or neighborhood has flooded in the past can be helpful, and you can learn a lot from simply looking at the landscape in and around your home.

If your house is at the bottom of a hillside, for example, it’s probably more susceptible to debris flows, especially if the slope burned in a wildfire in the last several years. Burn scars are especially vulnerable to landslides and flooding because they lack the established vegetation that helps hold soil in place and absorbs water during heavy rain.

Other landmarks to look out for near your property are creeks, canals, drainage channels, debris basins and even low-lying roadways.

It’s also a good idea to understand how rainwater flows onto your property, where it collects and how it leaves. The goal should be for water to flow through your property safely and efficiently, without causing damage to neighbors.

That means clearing debris and overgrowth from gutters and drains now, before extreme weather hits.

Officials are also urging residents to report clogged or blocked storm drains to their local public works department.

If you live in L.A. County and are concerned about potential mud or debris flows, you can contact the county’s Department of Public Works for free advice.

Sandbags

If your property is at high risk of flooding, consider stockpiling sandbags. Many fire departments and public works departments offer sandbags to their local communities.

You can check sandbag distribution locations and availability here:

• L.A. County
• Orange County 
• Ventura County
• Santa Barbara County
• Riverside County
• San Bernardino County

Be prepared to fill the sandbags yourself, as most places only offer empty ones. Never fill sandbags with beach sand or empty used ones onto the beach.

Once you have sandbags, make sure you know how to use them properly.

Here are a few tips:

• Only fill sandbags half-full, not all the way full.
• Do not place sandbags directly against the outer wall of a building as wet bags can create added pressure on the foundation. 
• Sandbags should be placed parallel to the direction of water flow.
• The open ends of sandbags should be folded underneath and face upstream so they aren’t forced open as water flows around them.
• Sandbags should be used to redirect floodwater rather than create a dam or block its path. 
• Sandbags can be used to protect doorways, but to do so, they should have a waterproof layer like heavy plastic or waterproof canvas placed behind them. 

This diagram shows the proper way to place sandbags so that they are parallel to the flow of water or debris and redirect it away from structures.

(

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works

)

Local agencies offer thorough instructions on how to use sandbags online. L.A. County Public Works offers a breakdown in its Homeowners Guide.

Sandbags and other materials for protecting your home, including plywood, lumber or plastic sheeting, should be stored in a dry location away from potential flooding.

Other flood considerations

If valuables could be damaged or destroyed by floodwaters, consider moving them away from the ground or, if possible, to upper floors. Keep important documents in waterproof containers or sealed bags, and make sure to create digital copies.

Another recommendation is to check trees on your property for dead branches, cracks or other issues that might make them unstable, especially those that hang over structures. If you’re unsure or concerned about your trees, you can hire an arborist to inspect them. To trim or remove them, you will likely have to hire a professional. Cities and counties generally do not handle tree maintenance on private property.

Finally, consider purchasing flood insurance if your home is at risk — and do so as early as possible.

Standard homeowners insurance policies typically do not cover flood damage, and new flood insurance plans can take at least 30 days to kick in. If you want to consider signing up for a plan, the National Flood Insurance Program is a good place to start.

If floodwaters do enter your home, public health officials recommend drying wet areas as quickly as possible, as saturation can lead to mold. If mold does take hold, clean the area using a disinfectant. Also, wear gloves and a mask to protect your skin and lungs and throw away moldy items that can’t be cleaned.

Jordan Corral had to do something.

It was late 2024, during a historically dry start to the winter. But the winter before that had been historically wet. This kind of “weather whiplash” is growing more common with a warming climate, research is finding. And it meant the hillsides of the Santa Monica Mountains were overgrown with invasive and highly flammable plants, such as black mustard, castor bean and fennel.

So Corral got to work. Alongside mentor Bill Neill, the president of the Santa Monica Mountains chapter of the California Native Plant Society, Corral pulled together a group of volunteers to pull out invasive plants.

Then came the Palisades Fire. Corral and his wife, Sara Marti, lost their apartment and had to start over. They’ve finally relocated to an apartment that survived the fire. Meanwhile, through their work for the nonprofit Resilient Palisades, Corral has launched a subgroup focused on invasive plant removal.

“The team is working on wildfire recovery while trying to mitigate the next wildfire simultaneously,” Marti said by phone on a day when Corral was out working with volunteers in Temescal Canyon Gateway Park.

Now, Marti said, their effort to heal the land has become a part of their own recovery journey.

“Being a part of the recovery has played an enormous part of personal healing,” she said. “It's meditative while you know that you're also making a huge difference, protecting the nearby neighborhoods.”

A half dozen or so volunteers, including Corral and Marti, have been regularly going to the park to remove invasive species, which choke out native plants and grow into dense, dry vegetation that can make fires more intense. They’ve also worked with local high schools and youth groups.

Now, they’re racing to get as many invasive species removed as possible, while at the same time planting as many native seeds as they can, ahead of a potentially very wet winter driven by El Niño. If the rain is as intense as forecasters are predicting, it could help invasive species flourish further.

Sara G. Marti, left, and Jordan Corral lost their apartment in the Palisades Fire and are leaders in the nonprofit group Resilient Palisades.

(

Courtesy Sara G. Marti

)

The effort has been boosted by a recent $24,000 grant from UCLA’s Philanthropy as Civic Engagement Course. The money will help hire expert field assistants and buy safety gear, among other things. Corral and Marti hope the effort can become sustained.

“It's not a one-and-done thing,” Marti said. “Invasive plants are going to continue coming back. … So we're really just trying to stay ahead of it as much as we can.”

In some ways, Marti said, the effort reflects their own journey to recover after losing their apartment in the fire.

“ We're probably never going to win, but we can't give up,” she said. “We have to keep trying.”

The city of Los Angeles will establish a fund to clean the 6th Street Bridge, where trash and other waste often pile up on pedestrian walkways. 

In a unanimous vote on Tuesday, the City Council approved the establishment of the fund, which will allow the city to accept and retain donations from private entities “to preserve this iconic landmark,” Councilmember Ysabel Jurado said. “Our commitment to this bridge has to ensure its longevity.”

Funds will go toward trash and bulky item pickup, graffiti abatement and other beautification services for the bridge. 

The dedicated fund follows the city’s hiring of Pasadena-based engineering firm Tetra Tech to restore the lighting of the bridge, which has been plagued by copper wire theft since its opening in 2022. 

The outages have frustrated residents and commuters who use the bridge to walk, run, bike and drive between downtown L.A. and the Eastside. 

This move also comes as residents in Boyle Heights and the Arts District grapple with how the 12-acre park beneath the bridge will be maintained once it opens in 2027. 

Community members have raised concerns about the possibility of homeless encampments forming at the park, as well as graffiti and whether copper wire theft from the bridge could affect the park’s safety.

Meanwhile, groups like the Arts District Little Tokyo Neighborhood Council, Arts District Los Angeles and the Boyle Heights 5K Run/Walk are filling gaps with an upcoming bridge cleanup in collaboration with Jurado’s office. 

The post City of LA will establish a fund to clean the 6th Street Bridge appeared first on LA Local.