{"id":10526,"date":"2024-07-08T11:00:50","date_gmt":"2024-07-08T18:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526"},"modified":"2024-07-08T11:00:50","modified_gmt":"2024-07-08T18:00:50","slug":"usca9-vacates-sf-camping-injunction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526","title":{"rendered":"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction"},"content":{"rendered":"

In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against San Francisco, preventing the city from enforcing its ordinance against camping on public property based on its precedents in Martin v. City of Boise<\/em> and\u00a0Johnson v. City of Grants Pass<\/em>. The decision was 2-1, with Judge Bumatay dissenting, noting that “there’s nothing in the text, history, and tradition of the [Cruel and Unusual Punishment] Clause that comes close to prohibiting enforcement of commonplace anti-vagrancy laws, like laws against sleeping on sidewalks and in parks.”<\/p>\n

Last week the Supreme Court reversed in Grants Pass<\/em>, taking the same view of the Eighth Amendment as Judge Bumatay. See this post<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Today, the Ninth withdrew its published opinion and replaced it with a brief “memorandum<\/a>,” i.e., an unpublished opinion. <\/p>\n

The anti-anti-camping injunction is vacated. The court of appeals affirmed the district court’s injunction to the extent that it requires, on Fourth Amendment grounds, the city to comply with its own “tag and bag” policy regarding homeless persons’ belongings.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against San Francisco, preventing the city from enforcing its ordinance against camping on public property based on its precedents in Martin v. City of Boise and\u00a0Johnson v. City of Grants Pass. The decision was 2-1, with Judge Bumatay dissenting, noting that “there’s nothing in the text, history, and tradition of the [Cruel and Unusual Punishment] Clause that comes close to prohibiting enforcement of commonplace anti-vagrancy laws, like laws against sleeping on sidewalks and in parks.” Last week the Supreme Court reversed in Grants Pass, taking the same view of the Eighth Amendment as Judge Bumatay. See this post. Today, the Ninth withdrew its published opinion and replaced it with a brief “memorandum,” i.e., an unpublished opinion.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,45],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-constitution","category-public-order"],"yoast_head":"\nUSCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against San Francisco, preventing the city from enforcing its ordinance against camping on public property based on its precedents in Martin v. City of Boise and\u00a0Johnson v. City of Grants Pass. The decision was 2-1, with Judge Bumatay dissenting, noting that “there’s nothing in the text, history, and tradition of the [Cruel and Unusual Punishment] Clause that comes close to prohibiting enforcement of commonplace anti-vagrancy laws, like laws against sleeping on sidewalks and in parks.” Last week the Supreme Court reversed in Grants Pass, taking the same view of the Eighth Amendment as Judge Bumatay. See this post. Today, the Ninth withdrew its published opinion and replaced it with a brief “memorandum,” i.e., an unpublished opinion.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-07-08T18:00:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526\",\"name\":\"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-08T18:00:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime & Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\",\"name\":\"Kent Scheidegger\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.cjlf.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences","og_description":"In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against San Francisco, preventing the city from enforcing its ordinance against camping on public property based on its precedents in Martin v. City of Boise and\u00a0Johnson v. City of Grants Pass. The decision was 2-1, with Judge Bumatay dissenting, noting that “there’s nothing in the text, history, and tradition of the [Cruel and Unusual Punishment] Clause that comes close to prohibiting enforcement of commonplace anti-vagrancy laws, like laws against sleeping on sidewalks and in parks.” Last week the Supreme Court reversed in Grants Pass, taking the same view of the Eighth Amendment as Judge Bumatay. See this post. Today, the Ninth withdrew its published opinion and replaced it with a brief “memorandum,” i.e., an unpublished opinion.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526","og_site_name":"Crime & Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2024-07-08T18:00:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Kent Scheidegger","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kent Scheidegger","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526","name":"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction - Crime & Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-07-08T18:00:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=10526#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"USCA9 Vacates SF Camping Injunction"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime & Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356","name":"Kent Scheidegger","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.cjlf.org"],"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10526","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=10526"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10526\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10529,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10526\/revisions\/10529"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=10526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=10526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=10526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}