Can a Common Sense writer examine the Martin v. Boise ruling, which deemed it "cruel and unusual" to enforce no-camping rules on public lands unless the city can provide immediate shelter? I would like to know more about the nuances of this ruling from a legal perspective--just what a city can and cannot do, and how this ruling might be …
Can a Common Sense writer examine the Martin v. Boise ruling, which deemed it "cruel and unusual" to enforce no-camping rules on public lands unless the city can provide immediate shelter? I would like to know more about the nuances of this ruling from a legal perspective--just what a city can and cannot do, and how this ruling might be challenged.
This ruling applies to Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The Supreme Court refused to consider it, so it stands right now, and clearly has an impact.
Can a Common Sense writer examine the Martin v. Boise ruling, which deemed it "cruel and unusual" to enforce no-camping rules on public lands unless the city can provide immediate shelter? I would like to know more about the nuances of this ruling from a legal perspective--just what a city can and cannot do, and how this ruling might be challenged.
This ruling applies to Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The Supreme Court refused to consider it, so it stands right now, and clearly has an impact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Boise