Saturday, February 22, 2020
"I fear that this disparity in treatment erodes the fair and balanced decisionmaking process that this Court must strive to protect."
Sotomayor, J., dissenting
Wolf v. Cook County
February 21, 2020
Monday, February 17, 2020
Thursday, January 30, 2020
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
In September, the usual sadists filed amici curiae. Yesterday, the supreme court denied writ of certiorari. Martin v. Boise can be cited in the 9th.
My guess is the roberts court lacked the necessary arguments to strike down the precedent, because it could be too embarrassing, while the judicial branch demands to revisit Amos 5. It could also be considered a punishment for the 9th, encouraging the poorest of the poor to migrate to the 9th. Eventually another circuit could develop a case that the roberts court can use to reestablish sadism in the 9th, and everywhere the country.
Sundown laws were struck down. Vagrancy laws were struck down. Car habitation laws were struck down. Functionally, nothing really changed. The sadists simply developed new PR tactics.
Rule of law is a farce.
Monday, December 25, 2017
II. Disproportionate and different impact of civil and political rights violations on the poor E. Restricting the access of the poor to public places Criminalization of homelessness 30. If being unable to afford shelter, decent food, a warm bath or even the use of a private toilet is not humiliating enough, homeless people can be, and commonly are, further stripped of their dignity and freedom of movement. The criminalization of homelessness is becoming increasingly well documented. Shortages of affordable housing and emergency shelter beds force people onto the streets, where they can then be fined and imprisoned. "Quality of life" offences, such as "camping" in public, sleeping in a public place, begging in public, loitering, sitting or lying down in public places and sleeping in vehicles, can be impossible for the homeless to avoid. To add insult to injury, the enforcement of such laws is very costly; a cruel irony when public funding could instead be directed to poverty alleviation for this group.
I wonder how much money the U.N. spent, and how much cheese was chewed, in the production of the obvious, for their tardy homework.
Thursday, August 24, 2017
Friday, February 19, 2016
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
The Bell v. Boise case was a sprout of hope on a dark and gloomy judicial branch. Sadly, the all-too-typical strangulation via procedural technicalities occurred, yet again, and this time it was the NLCHP that went limp. One of the excuses used: some plaintiffs were no longer homeless, implying they were no longer at risk of citation (yet another reason why protected class status is needed, for the hate laws are obviously targeted and selectively enforced). Perhaps the NLCHP club was exhausted by the planning of their McKinney-Vento Awards cheese chewing party held at The Liason. I can only wonder if, arriving or leaving, any tipsy attendees stepped over anyone sleeping illegally.
It isn't the first time the fight for homeless civil rights has been used and abandoned. Perhaps there should be laws discouraging such predatory cynicism?
Meanwhile, back in Santa Cruz; Tristia Bauman from the NLCHP will be speaking at Sleep Is A Right. Is it a PR appearance? Prelude to a case? The food will be vegan, so chewing cheese seems unlikely.