Martin v. Boise
2018 court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Martin v. Boise (full case name Robert Martin, Lawrence Lee Smith, Robert Anderson, Janet F. Bell, Pamela S. Hawkes, and Basil E. Humphrey v. City of Boise) was a 2018 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in response to a 2009 lawsuit by six homeless plaintiffs against the city of Boise, Idaho regarding the city's anti-camping ordinance.[1] The ruling held that cities cannot enforce anti-camping ordinances if they do not have enough homeless shelter beds available for their homeless population.[2][3] It did not necessarily mean a city cannot enforce any restrictions on camping on public property.
Martin v. Boise | |
---|---|
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
Full case name | Robert Martin, Lawrence Lee Smith, Robert Anderson, Janet F. Bell, Pamela S. Hawkes, and Basil E. Humphrey v. City of Boise |
Decided | September 14, 2018 (2018-09-14) |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Marsha S. Berzon, Paul J. Watford, and John B. Owens |
Case opinions | |
Decision by | Marsha S. Berzon |
Concur/dissent | John B. Owens |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. VIII Boise City Code §§ 9-10-02 and 6-01-05 | |
Abrogated by | |
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (2024) |
The decision was based on the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case, leaving the precedent intact in the nine Western states under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington).[4] In 2024, the Supreme Court effectively overturned Martin v. Boise in its City of Grants Pass v. Johnson decision denying the extension of cruel and unusual punishment to anti-camping ordinances.