Even Vagrancy Laws Unconstitutional?

If Supreme Court is foolish enough to rule there is a Constitutional Right to vagrancy (&/or squatting), maybe it’s about time they also told us public campers (& squatters) are inflicting “Cruel & Unusual Punishment” on the rest of us?

It's hard to fathom the WSJ even asking the Q, i.e., whether centuries old vagrancy laws are “cruel & unusual punishment” as homeless advocates are now arguing before the High Court. Yet, the Supremes have finally agreed to consider if progressive cities who created their homeless nightmares can “enforce public order” they let deteriorate for so long. As the editors snickered: “Wouldn’t it be rich if conservative Justices rescue progressive cities from themselves” in City of Grants Pass v Johnson? In that case, a panel of the progressive Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022 blocked the Oregon town of Grants Pass from enforcing “anti-camping” laws on public property supposedly because the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel & unusual punishment prohibits cities from arresting or imposing penalties on homeless people for squatting on public property if there aren’t enough shelter beds for every single vagrant wandering about.

As is often the case with progressives who make up new Constitutional law interpretations as they go along rather than rely on long established court precedents, they’ve sued cities across the West in progressive-friendly courts to stop them from even citing homeless people who have set up tents inside a public playground & even when having been offered temporary housing. It’s all goofy public policy as well as law. But, let’s see how the US Supreme Court finally, if way too belatedly, weighs in.

Davd Soul