Question: Is Honolulu opposing 9th Circuit rulings that invalidated laws against homeless camps on public property (808ne.ws/ 3S0d7kT)? If not, why not?

Answer: Yes, the City and County of Honolulu joined an amicus brief filed in September asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a 9th Circuit ruling that invalidated enforcement of certain rules against urban camping in Grants Pass, Ore.; the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction covers nine Western states, including Hawaii.

You can read the full amicus brief that Honolulu joined at 808ne.ws/3vy5FG1. It was filed by the city of Seattle and joined by numerous other Western cities under the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction, which say that some of the federal court’s rulings make it difficult or impossible to prevent homeless camps from taking over public spaces. Here’s a short summary of the amicus brief’s main arguments:

>> The homelessness crisis is complex, and 9th Circuit decisions have oversimplified the issues, paralyzing local communities’ ability to address problems where homelessness is most acute. “Despite massive infusions of public resources, businesses and residents are suffering the increasingly negative effects of long-term urban camping,” the brief says.

>> The 9th Circuit has reshaped local police power in conflict with legal precedent and preferred local governance. “A town that is not allowed to keep its sidewalks clear and parks open is not really a town at all. It is just a cluster of people living close together,” the brief says.

>> “The ‘shelter availability’ test is unworkable and imposes financial obligations on local governments in violation of the separation of powers doctrine.” Insisting that governments cannot enforce anti-camping ordinances when a town or city has more homeless people than temporary shelter beds “has the practical effect of imposing a judge-made financial obligation on local governments to provide public shelter options, regardless of whether local policymakers and their experts believe that is the best way to address homelessness. This test is made even more impracticable because it determines whether a population is ‘involuntarily homeless’ while also failing to supply a workable definition of that term,” the brief says. “Injunctions like these amount to a forced choice: build more shelter or surrender public spaces.”

>> “States and localities are responding democratically with bipartisan laws targeting the causes of homelessness,” and federal judges should not play such an overwhelming role in trying to solve the complex problems of modern life. “Debates on the optimal response to social issues like homelessness need to be held in legislatures, not in courtrooms,” the brief says.

The amicus brief that Honolulu joined is one of several filed by or supported by dozens of cities in Western states that want the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn 9th Circuit rulings the cities say have allowed hazardous homeless camps to proliferate. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to review the Oregon case, Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, 808ne.ws/47B3oHt.

Mahalo

I want to thank the members of the Lions Club who worked hard to get those rescue tubes installed. They will save lives. I can remember when I was young and I thought I was immortal. Everybody can make mistakes in the ocean and overestimate their endurance. I am glad there is something there to help the tourists (and others) who get in trouble. — A reader

(Note: Oahu’s municipal government announced last week that it had partnered with the Lions Club “to make 20 rescue tubes publicly available along roughly 20 miles of O‘ahu’s southern and Windward shores.” The 52-inch-long, yellow foam flotation devices “are affixed to designated, highly visible stands, and are readily available for use by any beachgoer in emergency situations,” the city said.)

Write to Kokua Line at Honolulu Star-Advertiser, 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, HI 96813; call 808-529-4773; or email kokualine@staradvertiser.com.