Oregon SATF Statement on SCOTUS Decision in Johnson v. Grants Pass
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) released their decision on Johnson v. the city of Grants Pass. At its core, this case decided whether cities are allowed to punish people for situations such as sleeping outside with a pillow or blanket, even when there are no safe shelter options.
Prior to the decision, Oregon SATF joined alongside several other state and national sexual and domestic violence organizations on an amicus brief highlighting how a decision in favor of the defendants would have lasting impacts on survivors experiencing houselessness.
Understanding the Scope and Intersections between Sexual Violence + Safe Housing
The intersections between experiencing sexual violence and housing instability are clear and well documented:
Access to, and the ability to seek out, safe sleeping spaces and housing is a critical protective factor against sexual violence. Safer sleeping spaces may include public spaces when shelter and affordable, accessible, supportive housing is unavailable or inaccessible.
Stigma and criminalization of houselessness create additional barriers for survivors of sexual and domestic violence seeking safety, and increase risks of re-victimization.
Threats of arrest, fines, or other criminal justice involvement can be used by perpetrators of violence to maintain control and contact with victims and survivors.
Economic costs associated with experiencing sexual violence can be substantial: “These unforeseen costs and impacts of sexual assault can increase the likelihood of homelessness, unemployment and interrupted careers or education (Greco). This can create cyclical risk of revictimization, since an individual with an income under $7,500 is twice as likely to face sexual assault as the general population due to increased vulnerability (BJS).” SOURCE
Additionally, we encourage stakeholders to review the National Sexual Violence Resource Center’s article “Addressing National Trends in Housing Insecurity” and subsequent infographic “What are the Links Between Sexual Violence and Housing?” for more information and resources about the overlaps between sexual and domestic violence and housing insecurity.
SCOTUS’ Decision
Unfortunately, the decision is not what we and other advocates for those experiencing homelessness/houselessness and survivors had hoped for. The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit on the issue before them as to whether the cruel and unusual punishment clause prohibits cities from punishing its homeless residents who have no place else to go when they take necessary steps to stay warm, and dry, and alive.
What does this mean for Oregon?
Importantly, in Oregon, the Supreme Court’s ruling should not lead to more criminalization, because of the existence of ORS 195.530, which offers protection against unreasonable restrictions on peoples’ ability to sleep, rest and stay warm and dry while living outside.
As a reminder, this law allows cities to regulate encampments, but specifies that restrictions must be objectively reasonable as to time, place and manner with regards to persons experiencing homelessness. ORS 195.530 allows local governments to reasonably manage their public spaces, while ensuring critical protection for our state’s most vulnerable residents. Cities across Oregon have implemented policies using HB 3115 as a guide.
What next?
Oregon SATF will continue to work with our multidisciplinary partners, including the Oregon Law Center, the Oregon Alliance to End Gender-based Violence, the Oregon Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence (amongst others) to ensure and build upon Oregon’s commitment and investments in safe, accessible, supportive, affordable housing. Ensuring that Oregonians, and those that are victims and survivors of sexual violence, have access to safe housing is our collective pathway to solving the issue of houselessness - not criminalization.
