Can cities fine unhoused people for sleeping outside?
Post Reports
The Washington Post
4.4 • 5.1K Ratings
🗓️ 22 April 2024
⏱️ 31 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the most significant legal challenge to the rights of unhoused people in decades. On “Post Reports,” we hear from a correspondent who visited the city at the center of the debate.
Read more:
In the small city of Grants Pass, Ore., hundreds of people are living outside, with many camping in the public parks. The anti-camping laws in Grants Pass allow the city to fine those living in public spaces. But unhoused people in the city say that the fines are a violation of the Eighth Amendment and amount to cruel and unusual punishment, since the city has no homeless shelters and they have nowhere else to go.
“The more I've been out here, the more angry I get, because I've noticed that they're trying to push us out altogether,” said Laura Gutowski, who has been unhoused since 2021. “They're just trying to push, push, push until we give up and say, ‘Fine, I'll leave town.’”
Reis Thebault is The Post’s West Coast correspondent and traveled to Grants Pass to talk with unhoused people at the center of the case.
“If the Supreme Court were to agree with the 9th Circuit, then cities across the country would find their hands tied as they work to address the urgent homelessness crisis,” argues Theane Evangelis, the lead attorney for Grants Pass.
Today’s show was produced by Sabby Robinson. It was edited by Lucy Perkins and mixed by Sean Carter. Thanks also to Ann Marimow.
Subscribe to The Washington Post here.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | The number of unhoused people in the US is reaching record levels, and today the Supreme Court heard |
| 0:08.9 | oral arguments in a case that could change how governments address that growing population. |
| 0:14.9 | The central issue is whether governments can ban people from sleeping or camping outside |
| 0:21.2 | when they have nowhere else to go. |
| 0:22.8 | And it could be the most unsequential case |
| 0:26.4 | for the rights of un-housed people in decades. |
| 0:30.0 | That's Reese Tebo. |
| 0:31.2 | He's the West Coast correspondent for the post. |
| 0:33.9 | Rees recently traveled to Grants Pass, Oregon, the city at the center of this case. |
| 0:39.7 | Like many cities, the |
| 0:44.0 | cities, the unhoused population in Grants Pass has grown a lot in |
| 0:48.3 | recent years and many people have been living in public spaces like parks. One of the ways the city has |
| 0:54.4 | responded is through fines, but some of those unhoused people took the city to |
| 1:00.0 | court and today their lawyers argued before the Supreme Court that punishing |
| 1:05.6 | them like this is a violation of their constitutional rights, since they have nowhere |
| 1:11.0 | else to go. |
| 1:12.0 | The city interprets and applies the ordinances to permit non-homeless people to rest on blankets in public parks, |
| 1:19.0 | while a homeless person who does the same thing breaks the law. |
| 1:22.0 | The ordinances by design make it physically |
| 1:25.2 | impossible for homeless people to live in grants pass without facing endless fines and jail time. |
| 1:31.1 | From the newsroom of the Washington Post, this is Post Reports. I'm |
| 1:37.8 | Martin Powers. It's Monday, April 22nd. Today, how a legal challenge brought by unhoused people in Grants Pass |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Washington Post, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of The Washington Post and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.