On April 22, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in The City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, the case that will determine whether it is constitutional for local governments to criminalize sleeping outside.
The Nevada Housing Justice Alliance spoke out regarding the case, as well as two recent local camping-ban ordinances—one passed by the city of Sparks, and the other by Washoe County.
The group’s press release reads: “The Nevada Housing Justice Alliance opposes policies that turn low-income, houseless Nevadans into criminals. The NHJA condemns leaders at all levels of government who would attempt to arrest their way out of the housing crisis as opposed to supporting its citizens with meaningful housing policies that work.”
The question central to Grants Pass v Johnson is whether an anti-camping law in Grants Pass—an Oregon city of about 40,000—goes so far in punishing people for being unhoused that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Ben Iness is the NHJA’s coalition coordinator. He grew up in Las Vegas, where, he said, his childhood was defined by instability, including multiple evictions. Today, he holds a master’s degree in social work from the University of Nevada, Reno.
Iness said in an April 22 interview with the RN&R that if the Supreme Court sides with Grants Pass, “they would say that it is constitutional to criminalize—through fines, fees and jail time—those who are poor, those who are down and out, and those who are living on the streets and engaging in life-sustaining activities.”
According to the Point in Time Count, which takes place annually in cities nationwide, 1,690 people in Washoe County were in shelters, in transitional housing or unhoused in 2023. (Figures for 2024 have not yet been released.) This is the figure used by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and other authorities, although activists and others have questioned its accuracy for years.
Iness is concerned that elected leaders across the board are operating under the theory that “we can just build our way out of this.” His group is in favor of long-term solutions to homelessness, including assistance to help tenants deal with rising rents and making adjustments to the eviction process. In the short term, he’s concerned about seeing people “quickly and violently displaced.”
“I believe (Washoe County Commission Chair Alexis) Hill made a comment about, you know, it’s just about compromise, and sometimes you have to push things or pass things or work with folks and meet in the middle. But I don’t know why it feels like our community and those who are most struggling have to compromise.”
Hill also spoke with the RN&R on April 22.
“Washoe County is in charge of supporting … our most vulnerable community members,” she said. “We have worked together with the region, and we have put over $100 million dollars into the CARES campus and the Our Place campus”— shelters in Reno and Sparks, respectively.
“Regardless of how the court ruling goes, we are fully committed to getting people emergency shelter, and then getting people housed,” Hill said. “We have adopted a housing-first model, and we are actually very successful in getting people in permanent housing in our community—but finding people appropriate housing is a difficult thing.”
Since Washoe County’s anti-camping ordinance passed, deputies now have what officials call a “tool” to motivate people who are unhoused to seek services. Encampments that fall within the county’s jurisdiction include some that are along the Truckee River in Verdi and between Sparks and Storey County, and some that are near residential areas in Sun Valley. In addition to county land, the county can enforce the ordinance on state land within 300 feet of the river.
So far, said Hill, “We have not arrested anyone using this ordinance.” It was passed on March 26.
The ordinance contains a four-strikes policy, Hill explained. “That was (the Sheriff’s Office’s) commitment to show the County Commission how seriously they take getting people help first. … We’ll be reviewing the outcomes of the ordinance at our quarterly jail report by the Sheriff’s Office … to see if it’s the tool that staff is claiming that they needed.”
Added Hill: “There are no perfect answers.”
Iness sees it this way: “What this bill does is kind of terrorize a community that is already struggling the most. … If the court rules in favor of Johnson (meaning local governments can’t ban camping), we establish as a baseline, as a country, that we do not punish those most in need.”
After the Supreme Court heard the arguments on April 22, national media outlets reported that the justices appeared split along ideological lines. According to The New York Times, “The conservative majority appeared sympathetic to arguments by the city of Grants Pass, Ore., that homelessness is a complicated issue that is best handled by local lawmakers and communities, not judges.”
The Supreme Court decision on Grants Pass v. Johnson is expected to be issued in June.