A man in California thought he was burying his son. Frank J. Kerrigan spent $20,000 on the funeral ceremony and accepted that his son, Frank M. Kerrigan, was gone. But 11 days after the funeral he found out the person in the casket was someone else. Understandably, he was shocked when a friend called and put his son on the line

The Orange County coroner misidentified Kerrigan’s son, who is 57 and has a mental illness and is living on the streets. Police said he was identified through fingerprints, and so identification by family members was unnecessary. But the Kerrigan family’s attorney said the fingerprint identification failed, so officials instead used an old driver’s license photo.

“When somebody tells me my son is dead, when they have fingerprints, I believe them,” Kerrigan said.

Apparently the men must have looked very much alike, as the family did not realize the mistake despite having an open casket at the funeral. Now family members are planning to sue the coroner’s office, saying that authorities didn’t care much about making a positive identification of Kerrigan because he is homeless.

Father buries his son in $20k funeral – then told days later that the coroner made a mistake and his son is ALIVE! https://t.co/Qr0cpWM5La pic.twitter.com/Qzv8hNR2BI

— Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) June 24, 2017

Frank’s sister Carole Meikle visited the scene where she believed her brother had died. “It was a very difficult situation for me to stand at a pretty disturbing scene. There was blood and dirty blankets,” she said.

It is unclear how the man passed away, but the bloody scene did not match what officials had told the family–that Frank passed away “peacefully.” The dead man’s identity is unknown.

Frank chose to go back to the streets. But because of the authorities’ mistake, federal agencies also think Frank is dead and have stopped providing his disability payments. The family is currently working on straightening the situation out.

The Kerrigans informed the authorities of the mix-up, and the Sheriff’s Department extended regrets for “any emotional stress caused as a result of this unfortunate incident. As part of the internal investigation, this incident and all identification policies and procedures will be reviewed to ensure no further misidentifications occur.”

A lot of people came from as far as Las Vegas and Washington to attend the funeral, and the dead man was buried close to Frank’s mother’s grave, in a spot reserved for family members. “We thought we were burying our brother,” said Meikle. “Someone else had a beautiful send-off. It’s horrific.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Family Buries Wrong Person After Coroner Mix-Up appeared first on Law Street.

In a story that proves there’s at least some humanity left in the world, the Italian Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a homeless man for stealing food this week, saying that since he was hungry, his actions did not constitute criminal activity.

The BBC reports that Roman Ostriakov stole two pieces of cheese and a pack of sausages from a supermarket in Genoa in 2011, and was sentenced to six months in jail and a €100 fine for theft. However, his case was sent for an appeal to reduce his conviction to “alleged theft,” since he was caught before he left the shop.

Instead of just reducing the sentence, Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation (the country’s highest court) overturned it entirely, saying that “he took possession of that small amount of food in the face of the immediate and essential need for nourishment, acting therefore in a state of need.”

According to the New York Times, a former member of the Court stated that the basis of the court’s decision relied on an Italian legal doctrine that translates to “No one is expected to do the impossible.” Essentially, because his circumstances made it such that he had no other choice, his theft was not a crime. However, as Vox notes, this decision does not set a precedent, so no need to worry about a wave of food thefts as a result of this case.

While this decision doesn’t stand to alter the current laws in any way, it is a great example of a legal system working to uphold human rights and dignity. As a piece in Italian newspaper Corriera Della Sera notes, the growing crisis of poverty in Italy makes Ostriakov an unlikely hero for the underserved. In this reverse “Les Miserables” situation, justice is with the proletariat. The compassion of the Court could go a long way in promoting broader societal attitudes, simply by advocating for something as basic as humanity for the common man.

Mariam Jaffery

Mariam was an Executive Assistant at Law Street Media and a native of Northern Virginia. She has a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Business Administration from George Washington University. Contact Mariam at mjaffery@lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Italian Court Says Stealing Food Isn’t a Crime If You’re Poor and Hungry appeared first on Law Street.

Governor David Ige has officially declared a state of emergency in Hawaii. The declaration is in response to the state’s homelessness crisis, as Hawaii has the highest rate of homelessness in the country. The state of emergency will allow the state to aid this large population by rapidly channeling money into confronting the problem head-on.

Hawaii’s rate of homelessness is 465 individuals per 100,000 people. All said and done, there are just under 8,000 homeless individuals total. While that might seem like a relatively small number, given Hawaii’s population, it makes for a large per capita total. HOPE Services Hawaii, a non-profit that works with the state’s homeless, estimates that 11 percent of the homeless population are children, 14 percent are veterans, and 32 percent are of Native Hawaiian ethnicity.

One of the most tangible ways in which the state has attempted to combat the homelessness crisis came in the form of a clean out of one of the state’s largest homeless encampments in Kaka’ako. Since August, 54 percent of the homeless population living in Kaka’ako has been moved into shelters or temporary housing. Ige intends that the clearing of Kaka’ako be used as a model for transitioning other encampments.

The emergency declaration will allow that process to be sped up. According to a press release put out by the governor’s office:

State funds of more than $1.3 million were identified this month, paving the way for the emergency proclamation. The monies will serve an additional 1000 homeless individuals between now and July 31, 2016, providing increased funding for homeless services and programs that promote permanent housing for families and the chronically homeless.

The emergency proclamation will also facilitate the construction of a transitional housing facility for homeless families. The facility will be temporary and have a clear sunset date.

Hawaii is also being relatively innovative when it comes to how it will be housing the homeless population. Russ Wozniak, one of the architects for the transitional housing units that are being created, explained that they are being created from old shipping containers, and have plenty of ventilation. They also will be insulated and situated in ways that keep the housing cool.

While it may seem extreme to some to declare a state of emergency in this situation, it makes a lot of sense. It will expedite the solution to a very real, very important problem in Hawaii. As Scott Morishige, who is working for Ige on this issue, stated: “This proclamation will expedite the state’s plans to help these individuals and families to more quickly transition to permanent housing.” The goal is certainly admirable; it will be interesting to see the results.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Hawaii Declares State of Emergency Over Homelessness Crisis appeared first on Law Street.

Millions of travelers visit Hawaii every year with the hopes of experiencing beautiful beaches, luaus, and other exciting adventures. With a record number of 7,998,815 visitors in a year, Hawaii is one of the most popular vacation spots for tourists. Because this is such a tourist heavy location, the city council in Honolulu has placed a few rules on the city that they believe will make tourists’ visits a bit more pleasurable. Most recently, Honolulu placed a ban that does not allow people to sit or lie down where a tourist can spot them–leading to controversy in the island vacation destination.

The island first placed this ban on the commercial parts of Waikiki, an area located on the southern shore of Honolulu, after receiving complaints about the city’s homelessness rate from the tourism industry. Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s spokesman, Jesse Broder Van Dyke, said at the time that Caldwell frequently received letters from tourists complaining about public drunkenness and urination. The city now wants to expand the sit-lie ban from just commercial areas to areas off sidewalks as well. Caldwell vetoed this bill, fearing that it is unconstitutional and could cost the city pricy legal fees. But the city council voted 6-3 in favor, overriding his veto. There is a huge concern that this ban targets those who are homeless and will put them in a position to get in trouble with the law. Caldwell stated,

If they make an argument that this legislation is based on targeting homeless, and not about commerce and business, then the whole bill is jeopardized.

Two members of the council, Brandon Elefante and Kymberly Marcos Pine, voted against the bill because they feel that it wrongly addressed the issue of homelessness. Councilman Ron Menor, who also voted against the bill, introduced a new proposal that would limit this ban to only commercial areas. Menor’s compromise never got a hearing in committee. A violation of the sit-lie ban ranges from warnings to fines and forced removal if necessary. Hawaii’s homeless population increased to 6,918 last year and citizens of Honolulu believe that the city should be more focused on providing housing and services than criminalizing homelessness. David Cannel, a 62-year-old man who was homeless for eight years, stated,

This is such a crisis. It’s a city of squalor. This isn’t a third world country. … Everyone has to go somewhere to get some sleep, at least. So where do they go?

While many have concerns that this law will hurt the homeless, the director of Hawaii’s Institute for Human Services, Connie Mitchell, believes that it is getting homeless people off the streets and beaches. She stated: “People are coming into the shelter. It’s working the way it’s supposed to.”

Van Dyke has made it known that Honolulu police will enforce this ban among tourists as well by saying, “Police have to enforce the laws equally against everyone. They don’t target homeless in park-closure enforcements.” A tourist that faces these charges can plead guilty by mail, or fight the charges in person. Failure to do so can lead to a criminal warrant for missing court dates. Mayor Caldwell has tried to address the homeless issue with a plan for a $42 million Housing First program which will not begin until later this year. He stated, “We have never promised we are going to solve homelessness, and I don’t think anyone who does is being honest. But I think we can make a dent.” The Honolulu Police Department will enforce the law, which depends on the number and type of complaints they receive about people sitting or lying on the sidewalks. City officials did not say when enforcement of the expanded ban will begin.

This leaves many people questioning if Honolulu really cares about the well being of the homeless, or if the city is more concerned with keeping tourists happy and bringing in their money. With more than 3.5 million people experiencing homelessness every year in America, this is a huge issue that needs to be addressed. Citizens want to see the city working hard to bring the homeless into shelter, rather than working hard to reprimand them because they are resting in a commercial area. Although many people seem to be against it, if the ban can truly help those who are homeless then it will become very beneficial for the city.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Honolulu’s New Law: Helping or Hurting the Homeless? appeared first on Law Street.

Well 2014 has come to a close. It was…well it was a year. A weird, occasionally amusing, mostly f’ed-up year. And now that the year has come to a close, we thought we’d give you one more dose of WTF. Without further ado, here’s a timeline of the biggest WTF moments of 2014.

February: Dexter Copycat

In February, a 19-year-old woman who’d clearly been watching way too much Dexter admitted to killing somewhere between 22-100 people, we’re still not really sure.

Nevermind the fact that that would be an incredibly impressive resume for a 19-year-old serial killer, the entire story was weird and didn’t add up, and definitely a total WTF moment. Read the full story here. 

April: Cliven Bundy 

In April, conservatives found a new cause celebre in the hands of poorly-vetted Cliven Bundy. Bundy’s beef with the government was pretty simple–he didn’t think he should have to get a permit to allow his cattle to graze on Federal land. However, the entire thing led to an insane standoff between Bundy, his friends, and some federal agents. He became the poster boy for the small-time farmer standing up to the oppressive government…and then he said a whole bunch of racist shit, including that black people may have been better off as slaves and all of his former friends ran very, very far away.

Read the full story here and here.

May: Donald Sterling

Speaking generally of racism, one of the most WTF situations was definitely the whole Donald Sterling controversy. He is, of course, the flaming asshole former-owner of the Clippers. An audio recording features Sterling asking his then-girlfriend things like “It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people. Do you have to?” Oh Donald Sterling, the fact that racists like you still exist and make a lot of money is a giant WTF is my book.

Read the full story here.

June: Slenderman Stabbing

In June, two preteen girls were arrested for stabbing their friend 19 times. They claimed that they were forced to do so by “Slenderman,” an internet character/urban myth. As soon as the horrific incident occurred, a lot of people wondered whether or not these girls were suffering from mental illness, could actually go to trial, and what exactly caused them to become so obsessed with “Slenderman.” As of now, they have been declared competent to stand trial. But there’s no doubt that the entire thing was incredibly creepy and very much WTF. Read the full story here.

July: Inappropriate Evidence

In the slow, hot, days of July, one story really made us scratch our heads. In Manassas, Virginia, a teenage boy was accused of sending a sexually explicit video, starring himself, to his girlfriend. But there wasn’t really any identifying information in the video, so the police tried to figure out whether or not it was a video of the young man. The only way they could think to do so was to take him into a hospital, induce an erection, and play a game of spot-the-differences with the erect penis in the video and the 17-year-old in their police station.

Read the full story here.

August: Homophobes…I Mean Homophones

In August, we saw the story of an employee at Norman Global Language Centre, Tim Torkildson, who was fired for writing a blog post on homophones. Homophones, being, of course, words that sound alike but having different meanings. Homophones, however, does contain the prefix “homo” and the Norman Global Language Center worried that it could be linked to gay sex. Never mind the horribly bigoted and ridiculous reasoning there, that’s shitty logic all around. Read the full story here.

September: Urban Outfitters and Kent State

Urban Outfitters–your go-to destination for a flower hair crown and general Coachella-inspired fast fashion–made headlines in September when it attempted to sell this sweatshirt:

Urban Outfitters criticized over blood-red-stained Kent State sweatshirt http://t.co/s1k9oMDLZV #Ebay #Atlanta pic.twitter.com/pYYXVcUTk3

— The Social Mailman (@SocialMailman) September 18, 2014

Yup, that’s what you think it is. A Kent State sweatshirt, spattered with blood stains. Whether Urban Outfitters wanted to generate some controversy–and publicity–or the people who greenlit this genuinely have their heads so far up their asses they’ve lost their eyesight, I’m not sure. Either way, it was certainly a major WTF moment. Read the full story here and here.

October: California Highway Patrol

In October, a few California Highway Patrol officers were caught playing an incredibly sick game. They were stealing nude photos off of suspects’ phones while the phones were being held in evidence, and then sharing them among themselves. Oh, and then they’d text offensive sexist and lewd things to each other about said photos. Great job guys.

Read the full story here.

November: No Feeding the Homeless

In November, some attempts at good deeds ended up going horribly wrong. Two pastors and a 90-year-old man got in trouble with the law for feeding the homeless in Florida. They were all cited for violating a Fort Lauderdale ordinance, which apparently forbids anyone from feeding homeless people. While I guess it could be considered some sort of public health problem, that seems a harsh law for those trying to be a good Samaritan. Read the full story here.

It’s truly been a WTF kind of year–here’s to 2015 being better.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Top WTF Moments of 2014 appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

I hope everyone had an awesome Halloween weekend! I spent the weekend in Chicago where I was surprised to see many homeless people sitting in front of some of the most expensive shops on Michigan Avenue. Houston certainly has homeless people too, but nothing like what I saw in Chicago, where I felt like we were pretty much stepping over people who were at their rock bottom. My boyfriend has a kind heart and on several occasions this weekend gave food to the homeless, and I thought that was really sweet. So I found it really ironic when I read the news that two pastors and a 90-year-old man were charged with feeding the homeless in Ft. Lauderdale.

Arnold Abbott has been feeding homeless people in Ft. Lauderdale for nearly 20 years! He heads a group called Love Thy Neighbor and was only able to get out three or four meals of the 300 that he had prepared for the day before the cops shut him down. Abbott, Rev. Mark Sims of St. Mary Magdalene Episcopal Church in Coral Springs, and Rev. Dwayne Black, pastor of the Sanctuary Church in Ft. Lauderdale, were each cited for willfully violating a city ordinance. Police issued them notices to appear in court where they could be asked to explain their actions. Explain their actions. Why do good people have to all of a sudden explain the actions of giving a helping hand to the less fortunate? Is this the kind of world we want to live in? I know I don’t!

Everyone gets down on their luck at some point and some have it worse than others, but what’s wrong with these people wanting to help the homeless? There is a large number of homeless in the Ft. Lauderdale area, which is why something should be done about that issue. Perhaps the city council should consider creating more shelters instead of taking everything away from them, including the ordinance it passed last Spring banning homeless people from having any possessions in public. They are homeless, where are they suppose to have the few things that they own? I get that the homeless population may be growing in that city, but punishing people who are already hard on their luck is just counterproductive.

Cleaning up your city shouldn’t involve punishing those who are down on their luck and then punishing other people for trying to help.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pastors and Elderly Man Cited for Feeding Homeless in Ft. Lauderdale appeared first on Law Street.

As per usual, it’s Friday, so it’s time to scroll through a slideshow of all the weird crimes that have happened. I’ve been told it’s an excellent way to procrastinate your way to five o’clock, so enjoy this list of the top weird arrests of the week!

[SlideDeck2 id=27142 ress=1]

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Rama via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Though homelessness is not recognized as a protected class under the Hate Crime Prevention Act (HCPA), the National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH) has been tracking what it considers to be hate crimes for 15 years now. The coalition has documented more than 1,437 crimes against homeless people committed by housed individuals since 1999.

The FBI defines a hate crime as any “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” The NCH adamantly believes that targeting individuals solely because they lack a place to call home is just as serious as targeting them because of their ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.

“There is a very high prevalence of violence against homeless people. They are sought out and targeted because of who they are, and folks are being injured and attacked in large numbers,” Jerry Jones, executive director of the NCH, explained in a phone interview.

In fact, while there have only been 132 homicides in the last 15 years that qualify as hate crimes, the number of homeless related homicides is almost three times as many, totaling 375 deaths since 1999.

These attacks are believed to be motivated by the housed perpetrators’ bias against homeless people. Jones explained that the perpetrators of these crimes “view homeless people as an easy target since they’re living out on the streets,” adding, “they seem to be guided by a twisted rationale that no one will care if they get  hurt.”

With 610,042 people found homeless on any given night across the United States, and with attacks occurring in 47 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, this is quickly becoming a problem that can no longer be ignored.

Who’s Keeping Track?

One of the most disturbing elements of these crimes is the fact that they are not being recorded. No one aside from the NCH tracks the victims of this particular crime, which is primarily the reason why the Coalition is trying to amend the HCPA to include homelessness as a protected class.

“It’s part of our mission to highlight these [violent] acts,” Jones said of the National Coalition for the Homeless. “It’s an issue that we’ve dedicated a lot of time and effort to, but the government has more resources.”

If homelessness were to become a federally recognized protected class, it would require the FBI to track crimes against the homeless the same way that it tracks crimes against other protected classes. It would also show that the government acknowledges not only that there is a problem, but also the fact that these people are worth protecting.

While the NCH publishes annual reports that provide a vivid account of the crimes committed against the homeless, it does not have the resources that the federal government has at its disposal. A complete and accurate count of these crimes will not be possible until the federal government takes over the data collection process.

This is a problem because until we know the extent of the issue, fixing it is relatively impossible. From the data compiled by the NCH it is clear that homeless people frequently suffer from beatings, rape, murders, and even being lit on fire at the hands of housed perpetrators. But the question remains: is this enough to constitute the creation of a new protected class under the HCPA?

The Violence Against the Homeless Accountability Act

Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson seems to think so, introducing the Violence Against the Homeless Accountability Act (VAHA) last year. In a press release she states that “before we can solve the problem, we must understand the problem,” arguing that such legislation is needed to send the message that crimes against the homeless will not be forgotten or ignored.

Johnson is not alone in this belief either. Several states have taken it upon themselves to individually include homeless people as a protected class under their hate crime statutes. At least 11 states have passed some form of protection for the homeless as of 2012, but until homeless people are protected under federal legislation, the fight is far from over.

The Homeless Accountability Act only has a six percent chance of getting past committee in the House and only a one percent chance of being enacted. This is slightly lower than the average bill, which stems primarily from the fact that it has failed to garner support from Republicans who are opposed to any further expansion of the HCPA.

The Debate

There is a lot of trepidation about expanding the scope of existing hate crime laws as people are fearful that such an expansion will infringe on citizens’ freedom of speech and expression, criminalizing hateful “thoughts” rather than hateful acts (though the HCPA explicitly states it does not limit hateful thoughts or even hateful speech).

Another argument is that since homelessness is not an immutable characteristic like race, it does not warrant the same protection under the HCPA. Others believe that inclusion as a protected class is not necessary because existing laws are strong enough to deal with any discrimination directed toward the homeless.

Though it may be true that homelessness is not an immutable characteristic, the homeless are one of the most vulnerable groups in society, quite literally without a place to call home. They are veterans who served our country, struggling families who have had their homes foreclosed, and fellow citizens who no longer have the means or the mental capacity to support themselves.

They, of all people, deserve extra protection from senseless violence, yet current legislation has proven to be inadequate in protecting them from the violent actions of housed perpetrators. Until the homeless are protected under the federal hate crime statutes, the discriminatory violence they face will only increase and, sadly, continue to be largely ignored.

[The National Coalition for the Homeless’ Annual Report 2013]

—

Nicole Roberts (@NicoleR5901) a student at American University majoring in Justice, Law, and Society with a minor in Mandarin Chinese. She has a strong interest in law and policymaking, and is active in homeless rights advocacy as well as several other social justice movements. Contact Nicole at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Sebastian via Flicker]

Nicole Roberts

Nicole Roberts a student at American University majoring in Justice, Law, and Society with a minor in Mandarin Chinese. She has a strong interest in law and policymaking, and is active in homeless rights advocacy as well as several other social justice movements. Contact Nicole at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Crimes Against the Homeless: Who’s Keeping Track? appeared first on Law Street.

Trying to get by without a reliable place to stay is difficult. But it becomes nearly impossible when trying to live in a city where it is illegal to sleep in parks, to store belongings, or to stand outside buildings. This is exactly what homeless people are up against in many cities across America. Cities are increasingly turning to laws that criminalize homeless populations by outlawing fundamental human behaviors. With laws banning sleeping and camping in public, where should the homeless turn?

What are the statistics on homelessness?

Homelessness has been a problem for decades, but the root causes of the issue are complex. Homelessness is incredibly difficult to measure, especially since many people are forced into homelessness for only a temporary period of time. According to a one-night head count by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, more than 610,000 Americans were homeless in January 2013. Sixty-five percent of the nation’s homeless were staying in shelters that night. This means more than one-third were living in unsheltered locations — under bridges, in cars, parks, or abandoned buildings. Nearly a quarter of the homeless were children under the age of 18.

What have cities been doing?

Cities are increasingly passing laws that essentially make it illegal to be homeless. Most of these laws are designed for safety reasons rather than to put more homeless people in jail, but the effects can still be harmful. Numerous U.S. cities have public designs hostile to the homeless, such as benches with a mysterious third bar in the middle to prevent lying down and sleeping. Most cities have unevenly enforced loitering laws as well as laws prohibiting begging.

The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty released a report on July 16, 2014, tracking the laws of 187 American. Some of its findings:

• 57 percent of cities prohibit camping in particular public places — “camping” encompasses a wide array of living arrangements
• 27 percent of cities prohibit sleeping in particular public places and 18 percent of cities impose a city-wide ban on sleeping in public
• 76 percent of cities prohibit begging in particular public places
• 65 percent of cities prohibit loitering in specific public places
• 9 percent of cities prohibit sharing food with homeless people
• 74 percent of homeless people do not know a place where it is safe and legal for them to sleep

The problem is that these laws have increased in recent years. Since 2011,

• Citywide bans on camping in public have increased by 60 percent.
• Citywide bans on loitering, loafing, and vagrancy have increased by 35 percent.
• Citywide bans on sitting or lying down in particular public places have increased by 43 percent.
• Bans on sleeping in vehicles have increased by 119 percent.

Watch the video below for more information on the measures taken against the homeless in Clearwater, Florida:

Are these laws constitutional?

City bans targeting the homeless population raise a number of legal questions. While the laws are often ruled unconstitutional, they still thrive in most U.S. cities. Most people take issue with the fact that these laws are discriminatory in targeting the homeless population. Some argue that an activity like begging should be protected as free speech. A similar argument is made that the homeless should be afforded freedom from cruel and unusual punishment and should have the right to due process of law. The U.N. Human Rights Committee found criminalization of homelessness violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Other significant rulings:

• In April 2006, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that criminalizing behaviors and acts integral to being homeless was a violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments; however, the opinion was vacated when the two parties settled out of court.
• In August 2012, a federal judge in Philadelphia ruled that laws that prohibited serving food outside to the homeless were unconstitutional.
• On June 19, 2014, a federal appeals court cited issues of discrimination in striking down a Los Angeles law that banned people from living out of their cars.

What are the effects of these laws?

Typically the homeless are encouraged to stay in shelters until they can find affordable housing of their own, but oftentimes it is not that easy. Consider a city like Santa Cruz, California, where 83 percent of homeless people are without housing and shelter options, yet the homeless cannot lie down in public or sleep in vehicles. Or consider El Cajon, California, where 52 percent of homeless people have no access to a shelter, but sleeping in public, camping in public, and begging are criminalized.

Watch the video below to learn more about a law banning homelessness in Columbia, North Carolina:

Incarceration

Violators of these rules face fines or incarceration. As many homeless people cannot afford fines, they end up spending time in jail. With no permanent address, no regular transportation access, no place to store personal records, and few to no financial resources, the homeless targeted for criminal behavior have difficulty paying fines. If they can’t pay fines they often cannot get probation. This means they are incarcerated more often and for longer periods of time. For the homeless, getting into shelters and finding affordable housing is already difficult. But doing so after a previous arrest becomes nearly impossible.

Suspended Benefits

The homeless are typically eligible for a variety of beneficial federal programs, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security Disability Insurance (SSD), and SNAP (food stamps). Many homeless people are unaware of these programs. Since most of the homeless lack an address and application documentation, they have difficulty applying. SNAP has special procedures that give greater assistance to the homeless, such as providing the, with a representative and mailing benefits to homeless shelters. Most cities recognize the obstacles the homeless face in applying for federal benefits and employ outreach teams to connect homeless people to benefits and services. For example, Denver’s “Road Home” plan began in 2005 with the goal of helping homeless people with disabilities. Denver organized all the existing outreach programs in the city and added 20 more outreach workers as well as a program coordinator. In the first 3 years, the program helped 2,000 people in Denver access public benefits and services. Another program in Portland set up training to teach all homeless case workers what major benefit programs are available and how the homeless can apply.

One big problem is that having a criminal record makes people ineligible for certain benefits, such as federal housing subsidies. When disabled individuals are incarcerated, their SSI is suspended. If they are incarcerated for more than a year, SSI benefits are terminated and the person must then submit a new application. The process could take months or even years, meaning an increased chance for homelessness in the meantime.

High Cost

Recent studies show that laws targeting the homeless are not always cost-effective. The Utah Housing and Community Development Division reported that the annual cost of emergency room visits and jail stays for the average homeless person was $16,670. Providing someone an apartment and social worker would only cost $11,000.

A 2013 analysis by the University of New Mexico’s Institute for Social Research examined the costs of providing immediate, permanent, supportive housing to the homeless rather than the more typical transitional housing. Albuquerque’s “Heading Home” Initiative made extensive use of community partnerships to coordinate housing and services. Overall, the study found that housing the homeless is 31 percent cheaper than keeping them homeless, mainly because housed individuals use emergency services less frequently. Their research showed that simply by providing permanent housing, Albuquerque reduced spending on homeless-related jail costs by 64 percent. The costs of emergency room visits also declined 13 percent, while spending on mental health visits increased 34 percent.

Do these laws help protect the homeless?

Very rarely are cities explicitly aiming to make the lives of the homeless even harder by instituting these laws. Many cities see these laws as a way to ensure public safety as well as the safety of the homeless. For instance, laws prohibiting sharing food with the homeless are aimed at protecting the homeless from bad food. Food given illegally could be made with questionable food safety practices or could come from someone with more nefarious intent like poisoning the food. Other cities worry about the effects of public feedings. For instance, a church group may set up in a park next to a school, which would leave many parents upset over the safety of their children. Watch for rationale behind feeding laws below:

Laws outlawing public camping are often a way for the city to push the homeless to stay in safer shelters, especially in dangerously cold weather. Staying in a shelter generally keeps the homeless safe from people who may otherwise harm them on the streets. Shelters can also help cities connect the homeless to other beneficial social service programs. Officials also say these laws help to encourage better pubic hygiene and safety. Other laws target panhandling. Police object to panhandling since it is often done in high-volume, potentially dangerous areas, such as a highway median.

So why can’t the homeless find a place to stay?

More than 12.8 percent of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001. This is largely due to a steady decrease in funding for federal subsidies for standardized housing since the 1970s. There are fewer emergency shelter beds than there are homeless people. The number of shelters in the United States rises each year, but the increased supply of beds does not always correspond to the areas of highest demand. In certain areas where there is a lack of affordable housing, the shelters still do not provide enough beds. Further, waiting lists for subsidized housing in most areas are incredibly long. The city of Los Angeles has only 11,933 shelter beds for a homeless population of 53,798. If cities cannot provide adequate shelter beds, there is no place for the homeless to go but the streets.

Typically shelters are run by non-profit organizations associated with church groups or the federal or state government. Numerous national organizations, such as Salvation Army, United Way, and the National Alliance to End Homelessness, aid in the upkeep of homeless shelters. Most shelters require residents to exit in the morning and go somewhere else for the day before returning at night for a meal and to sleep. Shelters try to offer a variety of services, including job training and rehabilitation programs, but some are criticized for being nothing more than holding facilities. One shelter in Washington, D.C. in particular has dealt with corrupt workers preying on the homeless residents as well as a decaying building, contagious infections, and hazardous bug infestations.

Another significant obstacle is how to find housing for vulnerable populations like the previously incarcerated, the recently hospitalized, and veterans. Once released from jail or prison, many have no place to turn and no money to pay for housing. Those released from hospitals are also more likely to suffer from homelessness and even mental illness.

Housing First models have grown in popularity in recent years as part of the movement to find new ways to help the homeless. One of the first Housing First models was launched in Los Angeles in 1998 by the non-profit PATH Beyond Shelter. The success of the policy led to its spread to a number of U.S. cities. Rather than moving the homeless through different levels of housing, Housing First models move the homeless immediately from the streets or a shelter into their own apartment. The idea is that once housing is obtained, other issues like mental health or addiction can more effectively be addressed. By using a Housing First model, Phoenix became the first city to successfully house all of its chronically homeless veterans.

Watch the video below for more information on the Housing First program:

Libraries and the Homeless

With the homeless finding it increasingly difficult to find someplace to sit outside, libraries are a prime spot to spend their days. As social safety nets shrink, libraries have become more vital than ever to homeless populations. Libraries are free, centrally located, provide numerous books and computers, and allow the homeless to escape from snow or scorching temperatures. Increasingly, libraries have added homeless outreach to their array of programs.

Being a de facto gathering place for homeless populations can often deter use by other patrons. Striking the balance between making the homeless feel welcome and making other visitors feel comfortable is tricky. Naturally libraries deal with complaints regarding homeless people being loud, unclean, mentally ill, monopolizing computer time, and bathing in restrooms. Some libraries institute their own rules to mitigate these problems. For example, rules in Washington, D.C. prohibit alcohol, bare feet, carrying more than two bags, sleeping, or an odor that can be detected six feet away.

Watch the video below to see how a library in Burlington, Vermont, deals with the homeless:

Libraries have not turned a blind eye to the needs of the homeless. In response to problems with the homeless population, the city of San Francisco hired a social worker for its main library. The social worker is aided by five peer counselors, all of whom are formerly homeless. The library even implemented a 12-week “vocational rehabilitation” program. Graduates of the program are then hired to work in the system. Other libraries in Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia have since followed suit to hire social workers.

In Greensboro, North Carolina, libraries offer meals, haircuts, blood pressure screening, and job counseling. Libraries in San Jose, California bring library programs, such as computer classes, to homeless shelters. The central library in Philadelphia even features a cafe staffed by the homeless, who then use the job skills gained to secure other employment. The American Library Association calls for even more programming targeting the homeless, recognizing that libraries should provide training to staff and coordinate programs and activities to benefit that population.

Cities need more affordable housing to help the homeless. Ideally they should seek to confront problems of homelessness and provide solutions rather than criminalize homeless behavior. Naturally many communities do not want to have to deal with the homeless in public areas, but criminalization of homeless behavior is costly, unconstitutional, and hinders a person’s future ability to secure a permanent place to stay.

Resources

Primary

HUD: 2013 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report to Congress

 Additional

No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities

Reuters: U.S. Libraries Become Front Line in Fight Against Homelessness

Huffington Post: More Cities are Basically Making it Illegal to be Homeless

The New York Times: Shunting the Homeless from Sight

USA Today: More Cities Pass Laws that Hurt the Homeless

Wall Street Journal: A Crowdfunding App for the Homeless

Blaze: Top 10 Anti-Homeless Measures Used in the United States

American Library Association: Reducing Homelessness Through Library Engagement

NPR: Urban Libraries Become De Facto Homeless Shelters

MSN: Court Overturns Los Angeles Ban on Living in Cars

ALA Library: Services for the Poor

Arizona Central: Success in Housing for Homeless Veterans in Phoenix

Harvard Civil Rights/Civil Liberties Law Review: Jones v. City of Los Angeles: A Moral Response

NPR: With A Series of Small Bans, Cities Turn Homelessness into a Crime

Alexandra Stembaugh

Alexandra Stembaugh graduated from the University of Notre Dame studying Economics and English. She plans to go on to law school in the future. Her interests include economic policy, criminal justice, and political dramas. Contact Alexandra at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Costs of Criminalizing Homelessness appeared first on Law Street.

Army dismissal, felony conviction, homelessness, law degree? While certainly unconventional, that is the path that Desmond Meade took to obtain his law degree from Florida International University. After graduating high school in 1985, Meade pursued a career in the United States Army, which ended after he was caught stealing liquor while stationed in Hawaii. He returned to Miami, and was convicted of several drug charges as a result of living the fast-paced life of a celebrity bodyguard. In 1995, his mother passed away and shortly after, his family home was foreclosed. In 2001, Meade was sentenced and served 15 years in prison for possession of a firearm as a felon. After his early release, he found himself homeless on the streets of Miami. According to Mead in an interview The Miami Times, “when you’re homeless, there’s a harsh emotional aspect, no one really cared one way or another if you lived or if you died.” It was at this point that he realized that he needed to do something drastic to make positive changes in his life.

Meade turned his life around and completed the Chapman Partnership drug treatment program, a program specifically designed to help the homeless through their recovery. After he successfully completed the program, he graduated summa cum laude in paralegal studies from Miami-Dade Community College’s North Campus in 2010. He then took the next step, and enrolled in Florida International University Law School, from which he just graduated this past May.

Now, at the age of 46, Meade stands proud and with a newfound purpose in life. He is using his personal experiences to drive him in his work. He said, “I realized all the pain and suffering I went through all my life became worthwhile when I used it to help someone else, I realized that was my purpose — to help those less fortunate.” Meade is now the director of Lifelines to Healing Campaign, a PICO United program that aims to address and end the root causes of violence in cities across the country. In addition, Meade is working with the program to end mass incarceration in Florida.

However, there is still one thing standing in his way: Florida state law prohibits convicted felons from practicing law. So while Meade spent the past three years taking classes to prepare him for practicing law in Florida, he is unable to do so. Rather than move to another state where convicted felons are free to practice law, Meade is prepared to stay and fight for change in his home state. He says, “I’m going to stay here. I’m going to fight. What I went through to get where I am today, I have no choice but to have faith.”

This raises an interesting question–should convicted felons be allowed to practice law? Nearly every state has rules about getting a license to practice law, most of which make it nearly impossible for convicted felons to get their license. According to James Hirby at The Law Dictionary, “the person to be licensed must have objective evidence that he or she is a person of good moral character, complete rehabilitation, and a member of the community” in order to get their license to practice law. Many feel that a felony conviction is a direct contradiction to these qualities, which is why in most states–such as Florida, where Meade resides–convicted felons are barred from getting their license to practice.

While there is certainly a strong argument for this rule, not every convicted felon has bad moral character. States like Florida should have processes that make it possible for convicted felons to redeem themselves in a way and be allowed to practice law so long as they can pass the bar and follow the guidelines like everybody else. For example, in the state of Washington, convicted felons that wish to take the bar exam must go before the state bar’s ethics and morality committee and argue why they are fit to practice law. While there is certainly a high standard when arguing before the committee, this process makes it possible for convicted felons to get a second chance. People do change, and like Meade, they grow and learn from the mistakes that they have made.  While it is too soon to say whether or not Meade’s actions will have any effect on Florida law, he has already been an inspiration to people everywhere. He has shown that no matter where you come from, you can accomplish your goals with hard work and perseverance.

—

Brittany Alzfan (@BrittanyAlzfan) is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [ACLU of Southern California via Flickr]

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post From Felon to Lawyer: The Inspiring Story of Desmond Meade appeared first on Law Street.