City of Grants Pass v. Johnson

The enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court. The Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause has historically focused on what punishments may follow a criminal conviction, not on what behaviors a government may criminalize. Although, in Robinson v. California, the Court prohibited criminalizing the mere status of drug addiction, that case is distinguishable from laws that prohibit specific conduct like public camping. The Court has previously declined to extend Robinson to cover “involuntary” acts resulting from a particular status. For example, in Powell v. Texas, the Court declined to prohibit punishing public drunkenness by alcoholics, even though their conduct might be considered involuntary. Expanding Robinson’s narrow holding would risk turning the judiciary into the ultimate arbiter of criminal responsibility across diverse areas of law, a role for which the Eighth Amendment provides no guidance. Such an expansion would lead to practical difficulties, as demonstrated by the Ninth Circuit's attempt to implement this approach in Martin v. City of Boise. Cities have faced numerous challenges in determining who qualifies as "involuntarily" homeless and what constitutes "adequate" shelter under Martin. These judicially created standards have proven unworkable and have interfered with local efforts to address homelessness, ultimately undermining the democratic process and federalism principles. Justice Clarence Thomas authored a concurring opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined.