But it’s long been a common practice of small towns and cities to solve their bum problems by providing one-way bus tickets to places like San Francisco and Seattle. I pretty much gave up on going to/passing through certain parts of downtown Seattle due to the stench of human piss and feces. It’s gross. I thought the sidewalks in Paris were bad. Hahaha. It saddens me. Idiotic politicians like Kshama Sawant just made things worse. Is she a Trot? Is she a Naxalite masquerading as a Trot? Perhaps a vivisection is in order.
The famously left wing 9th Circuit Court ruled in 2018, Martin vs. Boise, that the city could not clear homeless encampments on public lands unless it first provided enough shelter beds for all those forced to move. Further ruling have expanded this to also exclude giving citations and fines.
The City of Seattle (also known as The People's Republic of King County) along with California Governor Gavin Newsom, have joined the petition for Supreme Court review as amici curiae. Other blue cities like Albuquerque, Honolulu, Milwaukee, San Bernadino County, Redondo Beach, and St. Paul had already signed as well as liberal organizations like the National League of Cities.
My first thought when reading about this was, wait...what? Especially Seattle, Honolulu and Newsom. Siding with red cities like Boise and Colorado Springs? Really? Reading the amicus brief reveals the basic argument is that this decision has deprived state, county, and local governments of agency to deal with issues via a sweeping Federal ruling.
Holy irony, Batman! Is this atop the "be careful what you wish for," list?
Aside from rich amusement at the strange bedfellows, I have thoughts.
First the original decision was idiotic, in that it assumes providing enough temporary shelter beds solves the issue of homeless camps on public property. Yes a mass sleeping facility that kicks people back out on the street every morning is the panacea. D'oh!
Second, the outcry from the left that reversing Martin vs Boise and subsequent rulings like Johnson vs Grant's Pass OR, is criminalizing poverty, is a dangerous fiction.
Ordinary citizens are not terrified of those homeless not by choice but by financial circumstances. These people are more than willing to accept assistance when available. Rather people are afraid of the many opioid and fentanyl addicts who steal and assault to support their habits, or who are mentally ill and manage their symptoms via these drugs instead of the limited anti-psychotics available via health care. These are the people who litter public sidewalks with used needles and human waste. These are those who refuse what few options are available for rehab and mental health care.
Absolutely we need better options for the homeless mentally ill and treatment for the addicts. But there also needs to be away to get people into such solutions, if and when they are provided, when they refuse to do so on their own. Local voters are supposed to be able to determine how these things are accomplished by voting for those who's ideas align with their own. The 9th Court ruling has taken that right away.
EDIT: In the latest chapter of there's no irony too great, the Governor of Oregon has signed on to a petition to impose strict emission standards nationwide on home wood stoves and fireplace inserts used for home heating. In Oregon, when a house is sold that contains a wood stove, the stove or fireplace insert is tested and if it fails it must be removed and destroyed. The petition would make this requirement Federal law.
So in summary, progressive western states and cities want the Constitutional guarantees for local and state freedom from Federal interference on selective issues that particularly inconvenience them (homeless people are attracted to these locales because of the temperate climate). However when there's an opportunity to virtue signal, then Federal imposition of local standards is awesome.
Got it.
