Supreme Court affirms homeless peoples' right to be on public property

Originally published at:


I am confused. Is this USSC or 9th circuit? Can the ruling be appealed, or is this the final decision?


It looks like the 9th circuit court ruled that homeless people have a right to sleep on public property, it was appealed to the SC, who declined to hear their appeal. I don’t know enough about the courts to know if another appeal is possible


The headline is perhaps not the most accurate. The Supreme Court didn’t affirm anything, it declined to hear the case to either affirm or overturn the 9th Circuit. So, the 9th Circuit’s decision is law in the 9th Circuit, but not necessarily anywhere else.

There’s no further appeal possible for the city of Boise on this, but nothing stopping another court outside the 9th Circuit from reaching a different conclusion.


I so dislike links to free/wall sites like Bloomberg. If I get 3 free pages ever few months, I’d rather not use those freebies for information I could pick up elsewhere. For these cites, please cite the destination at your link.


I would also think the law is a violation of the right to peaceably assemble.


But if another circuit court came to the opposite conclusion, that would mean the US Supreme court would likely take it on appeal. One good reason for the Court to hear a case is when federal circuits are split in their decisions.


When the higher court declines to hear an appeal, the lower court decision stands and is considered resolved at the Supreme Court level.

The only possibility here is a decision from another Appellate District in the opposite direction. If there is a conflict of law based on geography SCOTUS is compelled to hear it.


If SC declines the case, then, it’s done. The lower court ruling stands.

Much like the Right has been trying to get abortion outlawed for the past several decades, you can try to concoct different ways to give it another go but you’re starting back at the beginning.


Not strictly compelled. The Court doesn’t really have to act on anything it doesn’t want to. Contradictory rulings usually lead to the SC trying to resolve it, but they can get to it when they get to it. However, letting this ruling stand sends a message to lower courts.


having been homeless, I have to say this decision is genuinely touching. Wow! a right to be somewhere.


Get it together! Which are you speaking of, SCOTUS or the 9th??? Horrible, horrible charade of “reporting”.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.