THE BUZZ: WHEN OPPOSITES ATTRACT — Pigs must be flying over hell's frozen tundras: Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley are on the same side of a political fight. All it took was a homelessness crisis. The U.S. Supreme Court is taking up a case this morning with monumental consequences for how California cities address encampments. A lower-court ruling before the high court limits when local governments can remove encampments, if there isn’t shelter available for homeless people. Tents pitched in parks, under freeways, and across sidewalks have become painfully ubiquitous symbols of a problem that has consumed California politics for years, fanning public frustration at a lack of progress. Californians across parties and levels of government — from the Newsom administration to Democratic mayors to House Republicans like Kiley — have implored the Supreme Court to consider reversing the ruling in Grants Pass v. Johnson. Specifically, they want the high court’s conservative majority to overturn that Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling — an odd bedfellows situation as the Ninth Circuit is usually attacked by Republicans for its liberal rulings. The Grants decision invalidated an Oregon city’s anti-camping ordinances and prevented local officials from citing homeless people for public camping. The governor has forcefully argued that confusing legal limits resulting from the ruling have “paralyzed” cities throughout California as they try to clear encampments. In an amicus brief filed with the court, Newsom’s administration warned that cities “are trapped” in a no-win situation because they are at risk of being sued if they clear encampments, while at the same time they can be sued if they don’t immediately address the health and public-safety risks posed by street camping. Newsom has said while he opposes penalties for people sleeping outside, the Grants Pass ruling has been interpreted so widely that it broadly prevents cities from doing anything. Kiley, who said he plans to attend oral arguments at the Supreme Court today, has criticized the Ninth Circuit for similar reasons. He claimed its “misguided decisions” have led to increases in homelessness, crime and drug use. Perhaps no case study has riled Newsom as much as that of San Francisco, which has faced a monthslong restriction on clearing encampments. A judicial magistrate issued a partial injunction in late 2022 that prevented the city from clearing tents unless it offered immediate shelter. “I hope this goes to the Supreme Court, and that’s a hell of a statement for a progressive Democrat,” Newsom told POLITICO last fall. Newsom and San Francisco Mayor London Breed sharply criticized Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu over the injunction. The mayor hammered Ryu for trying to “micromanage” the response to a crisis in a city where she doesn’t live. Ryu has, in turn, said the city is falling short “by thousands of beds” to provide adequate shelter. The San Francisco case is effectively on pause pending the Supreme Court’s ruling. But it shows the uncomfortable politics for Democrats like Newsom and Breed — who find themselves praying that conservative Supreme Court justices will hand them a victory. GOOD MORNING. Happy Monday. Thanks for waking up with Playbook. Now you can text us at 916-562-0685 — save it as “CA Playbook” in your contacts now. Or drop us a line at lkorte@politico.com and dgardiner@politico.com, or on X — @DustinGardiner and @Lara_Korte. WHERE’S GAVIN? In Stanislaus County with the First Partner for an Earth Day event.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment