Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf
Page Number: 1.0

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2023 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

CITY OF GRANTS PASS, OREGON v. JOHNSON ET AL., 
ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS 
SIMILARLY SITUATED 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

No. 23–175.  Argued April 22, 2024—Decided June 28, 2024 

Grants  Pass,  Oregon,  is  home  to  roughly  38,000  people,  about  600  of 
whom are estimated to experience homelessness on a given day.  Like 
many  local  governments  across  the  Nation,  Grants  Pass  has  public-
camping  laws  that  restrict  encampments  on  public  property.   The 
Grants Pass Municipal Code prohibits activities such as camping on 
public  property  or  parking  overnight  in  the  city’s  parks.    See 
§§5.61.030, 6.46.090(A)–(B).  Initial violations can trigger a fine, while 
multiple  violations  can  result  in  imprisonment.  In  a  prior  decision, 
Martin v. Boise, the Ninth Circuit held that the Eighth Amendment’s 
Cruel  and  Unusual  Punishments  Clause  bars  cities  from  enforcing 
public-camping  ordinances  like  these  against  homeless  individuals 
whenever the number of homeless individuals in a jurisdiction exceeds 
the number of “practically available” shelter beds.  920 F. 3d 584, 617. 
After  Martin,  suits  against  Western  cities  like  Grants  Pass  prolifer-
ated. 

Plaintiffs (respondents here) filed a putative class action on behalf 
of homeless people living in Grants Pass, claiming that the city’s ordi-
nances against public camping violated the Eighth Amendment.  The 
district court certified the class and entered a Martin injunction pro-
hibiting Grants Pass from enforcing its laws against homeless individ-
uals in the city.  App. to Pet. for Cert. 182a–183a.  Applying Martin’s 
reasoning, the district court found everyone without shelter in Grants 
Pass  was  “involuntarily  homeless”  because  the  city’s  total  homeless 
population outnumbered its “practically available” shelter beds.  App.