U.S. Supreme Court building

Whatever the U.S. Supreme Court decides about the constitutionality of penalties for people who are homeless, it doesn’t seem likely to reduce homelessness. It may change where people can be homeless.

Clearing tents and clearing camps clears tents and camps. It doesn’t bend the arc of a homeless person’s life. It shifts the disturbing waiting room that most people we have met in it would very much like to leave and be housed.

Many people and officials feel, though, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling has unduly constrained the ability to control encampments and public spaces.

It is as Justice Elena Kagan said during oral arguments on Monday: This “is a super-hard policy problem for all municipalities.”

What rights do homeless people have? How far should cities be able to go to protect health and safety? Who should make the rules? Where should the lines be drawn?

The court was divided. A majority seems to favor upholding local camping bans.

People who help the homeless seem compelled by duty. That duty may have elements of empathy or religion or guilt if they fail to act. And unless more people feel that way, what a community does to help people experiencing homelessness will continue to fall short of what it would take to minimize it.