Talk:Martin v. Boise

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Infobox court case[edit]

I couldn't determine which parameter of the Infobox should be used for the opinion document link, so I made the full case name in the opening paragraph a link to the PDF. For future reference, could someone please identify where in the Infobox the link should be made or improve the Infobox court case to have a variable in which to store the address of the opinion?
--GarveyPatrickD (talk) 02:26, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Garvey, your stub article is inaccurate. I could fix it, but I can't edit the header. Here is the offending sentence:

The ruling held that cities cannot enforce anti-camping ordinances if they do not have enough homeless shelter beds available for their homeless population.

This is not the holding. Your sources seem to be newpapers, which notoriously get it wrong. Rlberrylaw (talk) 19:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson v. City of Grants Pass should be cited and linked[edit]

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ninth-circuit-revisits-and-clarifies-2378840/

> The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Johnson focused on—and ultimately struck down—two camping-related provisions regarding penalties for violations and prohibitions on the use of bedding, sleeping bags and related items. Both provisions and the court’s analysis are summarized below.

> Following Martin, Grants Pass amended its camping ordinance to allow the act of sleeping in public. Despite this amendment, the camping ordinance continued to prohibit homeless persons from using “bedding, [a] sleeping bag, or other material used for bedding purposes.” The City defended this distinction by arguing that Martin’s holding was limited to prohibitions on sleeping in public. On that basis, the City asserted that local regulations—such as a complete prohibition on the use of bedding, sleeping bags and related items—were outside the scope of Martin and thus permissible.

> The Ninth Circuit was not amused. The court noted that Grants Pass gets snow in the winter and the record indicated that homeless persons in the city have struggled against frostbite. Against this backdrop, the court concluded that the “only plausible reading” of the term “sleeping” in the context of Martin is that it “includes sleeping with rudimentary forms of protection from the elements.” 107.3.134.101 (talk) 10:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]