Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf
Page Number: 64

20 

CITY OF GRANTS PASS v. JOHNSON 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

violates the Eighth Amendment insofar as it imposes crim-
inal  sanctions  against  homeless  individuals  for  sleeping 
outdoors, on public property, when no alternative shelter is
available to them.”  920 F. 3d, at 604.  Martin was narrow.4 
Consider these qualifications: 

“[O]ur holding does not cover individuals who do have 
access to adequate temporary shelter, whether because 
they have the means to pay for it or because it is real-
istically available to them for free, but who choose not 
to  use  it.  Nor  do  we  suggest  that  a  jurisdiction  with 
insufficient  shelter  can  never  criminalize  the  act  of 
sleeping outside.  Even where shelter is unavailable, an 
ordinance prohibiting sitting, lying, or sleeping outside 
at particular times or in particular locations might well 
be constitutionally permissible.  So, too, might an ordi-
nance barring the obstruction of public rights of way or 
the erection of certain structures.”  Id., at 617, n. 8 (ci-
tation omitted). 

Upholding Martin does not call into question all the other
tools that a city has to deal with homelessness.  “Some cities 
have  established  approved  encampments  on  public  prop-
erty  with  security,  services,  and  other  resources;  others 
have sought to impose geographic and time-limited bans on
public sleeping; and others have worked to clear and clean 
particularly dangerous encampments after providing notice
and reminders to those who lived there.”  California Brief 
14.  Others might “limit the use of fires, whether for cooking
or other purposes” or “ban (or enforce already-existing bans 
on) particular conduct that negatively affects other people, 
including harassment of passersby, illegal drug use, and lit-
tering.”  Brief for Maryland et al. as Amici Curiae 12.  All 

—————— 

4 Some  district  courts  have  since  interpreted Martin  broadly,  relying
on it to enjoin time, place, and manner restrictions on camping outside. 
See ante, at 7–10, 28–29.  This Court is not asked today to consider any
of these interpretations or extensions of Martin.