Connect with us

Washington

As Mexico cracks down on migrants, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador gains leverage with Washington | CNN

Published

on

As Mexico cracks down on migrants, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador gains leverage with Washington | CNN



Mexico City
CNN
 — 

Last month, as the Biden administration scrambled to manage the latest wave of migrants overwhelming the US southern border, top US immigration authorities crossed into Mexico for an emergency meeting.

Seated around a Ciudad Juárez conference room, the officials and their Mexican counterparts drafted a 15-point plan to help defuse the flashpoint – most of it a checklist of actions for the Mexican government. Notably, according to a readout from Mexico’s federal immigration agency, Mexico agreed to carry out more costly deportations of the migrants gathering on their side of the border – a move that some believed would dissuade disorderly crossings.

The measures, which also specified Mexican efforts to clamp down on the crush of migrants riding north on railcars, are the latest in a series of policy shifts in Mexico that have alleviated, if slightly, the massive political headache in Washington caused perennially by migration. Analysts in both countries see a pragmatic bargain: as Mexico increasingly carries the weight of US immigration strategy, the Biden administration has granted rare leeway to the country’s divisive but popular leader.

Advertisement

“Mexico has real leverage in the relationship with the US. And right now that leverage is around migration,” said Andrew Selee, the president of the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute.

Sharing nearly 2,000 miles of land border and a history of important economic exchange, Mexico and the US have long held intertwined immigration policies that adapted as international migration patterns shifted. When George W. Bush made his first trip out of the US as president in 2001, it was to the ranch of Vicente Fox, the Mexican leader, to discuss a new era of cooperation on border issues, like trade, drugs, and the northward flow of Mexicans, who at that time comprised the bulk of undocumented border-crossers.

But as spiraling violence and desperate economic conditions fueled years of mass migration out of Central America and the Caribbean to the US, overpowering the country’s legal intake system, the stretch of Mexican territory in between became a critical “buffer state,” said Maureen Meyer of the Washington Office on Latin America.

“The Mexico southern border pretty much was the US southern border,” Meyer said.

Under pressure from several US administrations, Mexico has repeatedly sent resources to its border with Guatemala over the past 10 years to formalize migration routes and detained record numbers of migrants at newly installed checkpoints as they made their way north.

Advertisement

At the helm of Mexico’s latest immigration coordination with the US has been President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a leftist leader who in 2018 campaigned on resistance to doing the US’s “dirty work” on migration. His political calculus has changed swiftly since then.

Under the threat of crippling tariffs from then-President Donald Trump, López Obrador agreed in 2019 to allow asylum applicants to wait out their claims inside Mexico under the “Remain in Mexico” policy, roiling activists who said it forced migrants into dangerous living conditions.

During the pandemic, when the US employed a public health measure known as Title 42 to turn around many asylum seekers at the border, López Obrador agreed to receive many of the migrants, reversing a long-standing position in the country and straining the resources of Mexico’s own border cities. In May, as the US ended the use of Title 42, López Obrador continued to allow the returns on “humanitarian grounds.”

“I think these more recent steps really do cross another line because it is not just stopping people from coming to the United States, which has been the more enforcer role,” Meyer said.

“It is actually allowing people deported from the United States to either stay in Mexico, or in this case now, actually maybe actively returning them back to their home countries for the United States,” she said.

Advertisement

Details on the deportation plan announced last month have been limited. In a news conference from Washington on Friday, Mexican Foreign Secretary Alicia Bárcena said that Mexican authorities were carrying out six flights each week to return migrants to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Bárcena added that officials were “exploring” the possibility of expanding the returns to Ecuador, Venezuela, and Colombia.

It was unclear where the deportation flights were taking place and when they had begun. It also couldn’t be learned if the migrants being returned had already been deported from the US or if they had pending asylum claims. Stakeholders in Mexico told CNN last week that there had not appeared to be any significant change in the pace of repatriation flights in the country’s north.

A spokeswoman for Mexico’s federal immigration agency declined to provide more details on the deportations.

But the announcement may already have had the effect of discouraging migrants from crossing to the US without the appointment required to seek an asylum claim. In the weekend that followed the meeting, the number of migrants encountered by border authorities entering the US near El Paso, Texas, fell by about 30%, CNN has reported.

Last Wednesday, López Obrador also announced that he was planning a summit with officials from several Latin American and Caribbean countries “whose populations are migrating” to be held in the coming days. Mexico also last month agreed to urge countries like Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba — which have limited diplomatic relations with the US — to take back their citizens deported at the border.

Advertisement

“What we are looking for is to reach an agreement to confront the migration phenomenon by addressing the causes,” López Obrador said at a news conference. “We have to align ourselves.”

The recent cooperation between the two countries has come with a busy schedule of shuttle diplomacy. Last week, Bárcena held meetings in Washington with Senate leaders and Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, Biden’s homeland security advisor. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is expected to travel to Mexico this week along with other cabinet secretaries and meet with López Obrador.

For Mexican negotiators, the country’s increased responsibilities have often been conditioned on a US commitment to grow the ways that migrants can enter the country legally, like through temporary work visas and a recently expanded humanitarian parole program that the Biden administration says has allowed tens of thousands of Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans who meet certain conditions, including a local sponsor in the US, to fly into the country and secure work authorization.

Last month, ahead of the announcement around Mexican deportations, Mexico’s foreign minister told Bloomberg in an interview that the US and Mexico were nearing an agreement with the United Nations to pre-screen tens of thousands of migrants in Mexico for entry into the US under the parole programs. The US has opened similar processing centers in Colombia, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.

A United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees spokesperson told CNN that the organization is “regularly in contact with US and Mexican authorities including on how we can provide support to possible future initiatives.”

Advertisement

“Politically for the Mexican government, they can’t do enhanced enforcement without showing that they are also fighting for the well-being of migrants and for legal opportunities, because it is a country with a history of migration to the United States,” Selee said.

A free hand for Lopez Obrador?

Still, some analysts see a more cynical incentive behind the cooperation, arguing that the Biden administration has largely turned a blind eye to elements of López Obrador’s agenda that would have typically drawn rebuke.

“López Obrador very quickly understood that if he gave into Biden’s request for support he would have significant political capital to ensure that US pressure on a number of either bilateral issues or domestic Mexican policy issues would be constrained,” said Arturo Sarukhán, a former Mexican ambassador to Washington who has been a critic of the current administration.

Detractors point to democratic backsliding in a number of López Obrador’s positions: an attempted reform of the country’s independent election authority, frequent criticism of the judiciary and the press, and the capitulation of state powers on policing and transportation to the military.

The election reform, which was passed earlier this year but later blocked by the Mexican Supreme Court, diminished the country’s independent election authority, cutting its workforce across the country and limiting its autonomy ahead of a presidential vote next year.

Advertisement

Tens of thousands of Mexicans marched on the capital against the policy in the largest opposition protest of López Obrador’s presidency. Critics decried it as a dangerous erosion of democratic institutions.

But in Washington, the Biden administration was unusually muted. In a statement following the February protests, Ned Price, a senior adviser to Blinken, described “a great debate on electoral reforms on the independence of electoral and judicial institutions that illustrates Mexico’s vibrant democracy.”

“We respect Mexico’s sovereignty. We believe that a well-resourced, independent electoral system and respect for judicial independence support healthy democracy,” Price said.

If Mexico had less leverage in its relationship with the US, “I think that you’d see greater public pressure from the State Department, from the White House, on the slippery slope of democratic erosion that we’re seeing in Mexico,” Sarukhán said.

“I think the United States should be invested in Mexico’s democratic strength because if not, what you’ll have in Washington sooner or later is someone asking the question, ‘Who lost Mexico and why?’” he added.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Washington

Opinion | I’ve read student protesters’ manifestos. This is ugly stuff. Clueless, too.

Published

on

Opinion | I’ve read student protesters’ manifestos. This is ugly stuff. Clueless, too.


Visiting Columbia University last week to see the pro-Palestinian protests took me back to my own student days at the University of California at Berkeley, from 1987 to 1991.

As a journalist for the Daily Californian, the university’s independent, student-run newspaper, I covered a lot of protests for causes as varied as divesting from South Africa, ending U.S. proxy wars in Central America, getting the ROTC off campus and staying out of the 1991 Gulf War (“no blood for oil”). But underlying all of the transitory passions of the day, I detected a powerful nostalgia for the 1960s — that heady era when mere students could imagine they were heroic figures in the vanguard of historical change. It often felt as if the students of my generation were simply historical reenactors of past glories for whom the act of protest was more important than the causes for which they protested.



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Arizona to play Washington in Pac-12 softball tournament

Published

on

Arizona to play Washington in Pac-12 softball tournament


The Pac-12 Softball Tournament matchups were decided as much by who didn’t play as by who did. UCLA secured the No. 1 seed with a 17-4 record after playing three fewer games than No. 2 Stanford (17-7). As for the Arizona Wildcats, their fate was determined by the cancelation of a game they weren’t even involved in.

The Wildcats will play Washington after a stunning weekend for the Huskies. Arizona will be the No. 5 seed and UW will be the No. 4 seed. The game is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. MST/PDT on Thursday, May 9. All games will be played in Stanford, Calif. at the Boyd & Jill Smith Family Stadium.

Going into the weekend, it seemed almost guaranteed that Arizona would play Oregon. The question was which team would be the four seed and which would be the five. UW rolled into Salt Lake City with what appeared to be an easy path to the No. 3 seed. Instead, they dropped two straight games to Utah before the third game was canceled due to weather.

The Huskies’ inability to get things done against the Utes opened the door for Oregon. The Ducks were on the road at Stanford. The Cardinal couldn’t catch the Bruins for the top seed because UCLA’s winning percentage was boosted by playing fewer games than anyone else. They still had pride on the line, though.

Advertisement

If the Ducks were swept, they would fall behind the Wildcats in the pecking order and allow Arizona to finish in the top half of the league at No. 4. If Oregon won just one game, though, they had a shot at third due to Washington’s misfortunes in SLC. That’s exactly how it played out.

Oregon defeated Stanford on the Cardinal’s senior day to secure the No. 3 seed. That gave the Ducks a 13-10 record, tying Washington. UO took the third spot by winning the series against the Huskies earlier in the season.

Arizona might have preferred to play Oregon. The Ducks are the only team in the top half of the standings who lost their series to the Wildcats.

Arizona defeated Oregon 2-1 in a series marred by the scary injury to Duck centerfielder Hanna Delgado. The Wildcats won the first game 7-5, lost the second game 5-2, then came back to secure the series victory 3-2 in the final game.

The Wildcats lost their series to Washington 1-2, and it wasn’t pretty. The Huskies run-ruled Arizona in the first two games by scores of 13-2 and 11-3 in six innings. UA eeked out a 2-0 victory in the final game to avoid the sweep at home.

Advertisement

The biggest difference in the two teams is the pitching staff. Washington is second in the Pac-12 with a 2.52 staff ERA. Oregon is sixth at 3.18. UW’s 1.25 WHIP is also second in the Pac-12 while UO’s is third at 1.34.

In all likelihood, Arizona will face UW ace Ruby Meylan who is third in the Pac-12 with a 2.04 ERA and eighth with a 1.29 WHIP. If they face Lindsay Lopez, they get a pitcher with a 2.85 ERA (9th) and a WHIP of 1.23 (3rd).

The Wildcats got a total of 14 hits in three games against Washington. They gave up 29 hits.

On a positive note for Arizona, the Huskies did not rise to the occasion the final weekend of the season. They lost to the Utes 5-4 and 2-1 before the final game was called off. They have lost five of their last eight games and three straight.

If the Wildcats can pull off the win, they will face the winner of Thursday’s game between UCLA and either Arizona State or Oregon State. The Sun Devils and the Beavers will play in the 8/9 game on Wednesday, May 8.

Advertisement

The other games on Thursday are No. 3 Oregon against No. 6 Utah and No. 2 Stanford vs No. 7 California. All games are aired on Pac-12 Networks until the semifinals, which are on ESPN2.



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

The homeless in Washington state scatter as cities ban them from public spaces

Published

on

The homeless in Washington state scatter as cities ban them from public spaces


Every morning, John Parke packs up his tent and sleeping bag, piles them onto his wagon, and hauls all of his belongings off the grass at Foster Park, before the sprinklers go off at 8 a.m.

Whitney Bryen / InvestigateWest

John Parke, known as “Cowboy,” is always ready to pack up and move. He stacks his black and blue tent, foam sleeping pad, and flannel-lined sleeping bag on top of a wagon that he hauls away every day at 7 a.m. before police arrive and order him and the other unhoused people of “camp town” to leave.

Moving has become part of Parke’s morning routine. He had to move when officials in Clarkston, a small town in southeastern Washington on the Idaho border, closed the park where he was living in October. He moved days later when the city erected fences around another park where he was preparing his shelter for winter. And he moved again when the mayor declared 75 people at an encampment behind Walmart a “state of emergency.”

Advertisement

Now, the 45-year-old has to move every day so police won’t ticket him.

“They’re making it harder to get a job and improve our situation,” Parke said. “They’re acting like bullies at school, and I’m not going to let them do that, so I’m standing up for the homeless community.”

Washington state leaders highlight progress on homelessness, worry about cleanup funding

The city of about 7,000 recently restricted tents and other make-shift shelters used by unhoused people like Parke to one city park between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. and prohibited personal belongings that are “not essential to living.” Parke is part of an ongoing lawsuit against Clarkston arguing the ordinance is unconstitutional.

Smaller Washington cities like Clarkston are increasingly confronting the housing crisis more commonly associated with densely populated, urban areas.

Advertisement

That could be a preview of what’s to come, not just in Washington but nationwide, following a U.S. Supreme Court decision expected in June. Justices are considering whether to overturn lower-court rulings in Oregon and Idaho that protect homeless people from being ticketed, charged or arrested for sleeping on public property when there is no shelter available.

In the past year, at least five Washington cities and two counties responded to increased homeless populations with camping bans. In addition to Clarkston, the Northwest Justice Project, which provides free civil legal assistance to low-income people in Washington, recently sued two other cities, challenging the constitutionality of homeless restrictions.

Cities contend that these laws are necessary to control encampments, which are unsafe for inhabitants, the general public and the environment. In a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in, cities said they’re paralyzed by federal court rulings in Boise, Idaho, and Grants Pass, Oregon, that presume “temporary shelter beds are the solution to homelessness, channeling local resources away from longer-term solutions like permanent supportive housing, mental healthcare, drug rehabilitation, and low-income housing support.”

Civil rights attorneys said barring people from using tents or shelters on public property isn’t the answer either.

Advertisement

Those laws have forced unhoused people to scatter across the state. Where there are camping bans, constant movement becomes overwhelming for people without permanent shelter. Many seek refuge on public lands outside city borders and in nearby communities causing homelessness to spike there, often overnight. That’s what happened when the city of Lewiston, Idaho, banned camping in 2022, sending many of its unhoused residents across the bridge and into Clarkston.

John Parke and Tiffany Deen are among about 20 unhoused people who regularly sleep at Foster Park, the small space in the center of Clarkston that the city designated for camping.

John Parke and Tiffany Deen are among about 20 unhoused people who regularly sleep at Foster Park, the small space in the center of Clarkston that the city designated for camping.

Whitney Bryen / InvestigateWest

Howard Belodoff, the Idaho Legal Aid attorney who won the case against Boise, said a reversal would unleash cities to pass and enforce homeless bans.

“If they reverse it, every podunk town is going to take these ordinances criminalizing the homeless and adopt them,” said Belodoff. “These smaller cities have been trying to fly under the radar, but a reversal, well, they’re going to feel empowered to do it out in the open.”

Martin vs. Boise fallout

Since confining camping to a small park in the center of town in February, Clarkston’s “camp town” dwindled from 75 to about 20 people. One group set up a new camp in a wooded area about 20 miles northwest of town. Some walked back across the bridge to Lewiston. Others haven’t been seen in months.

Advertisement

A similar pattern has been playing out across the Northwest since the 2018 Martin vs. Boise ruling sided with homeless people who were cited by police in Idaho’s capital city when there were no shelter beds available. It was deemed cruel and unusual punishment.

Since then, cities have sought new ways to regulate homelessness, restricting when and where people could camp, sleep, lie or sit. Homeless advocates argue the restrictions make it more difficult for unhoused people to survive. Grants Pass, a city of fewer than 40,000, fined homeless residents for having blankets and pillows in public parks despite a shortage of shelter beds. A group of unhoused residents sued the city and, in 2022, an appellate court expanded protections for homeless people to include civil penalties.

Last year, Seattle and Spokane joined more than 20 cities, counties and organizations asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule those verdicts and give municipalities more authority to decide how to respond to homelessness. The Supreme Court heard arguments last week and is expected to make a ruling this summer.

Vancouver’s homeless shelter ambitions hit roadblocks with Clark College

Some cities have ignored the rulings, citing and arresting people even when there was no available shelter. Others, instead, ticketed homeless people for disorderly conduct or urinating in public. Some identified loopholes like environmental protections to support prohibitions.

Advertisement

With a Supreme Court decision still pending, Washington cities have continued to pass restrictions. Yakima County in south-central Washington has been removing abandoned encampments along the Yakima and Naches rivers for years. In July, commissioners adopted a policy against the advice of the county prosecutor allowing for the removal of inhabited camps, too.

Last summer, council members in Everett, 30 miles north of Seattle, banned resting or placing items such as a blanket within two blocks of behavioral health, addiction or emergency housing services.

In November, the Vancouver City Council closed an additional 48 acres of public property to camping. The following day, the Clark County Council banned camping near bodies of water, in parks and natural areas, prohibited daytime camping, and restricted storage of personal property.

As these homeless bans spread into the suburbs or smaller cities in Washington like Clarkston, civil rights attorneys said some are violations of the Martin vs. Boise ruling.

Many of those smaller cities don’t have overnight shelters. And those that do can’t keep up with the need. In Washington, people in temporary or emergency housing or without shelter have increased 52% in a decade, according to state estimates. In 2023, on a single night, that number exceeded 28,000, which is generally considered an undercount.

Advertisement

Rents are rising in every corner of the state, not just in the Puget Sound region, pricing low-income residents out, said Tedd Kelleher, housing policy director for the Washington State Department of Commerce.

“For people in the margins, the math that worked for them five years ago doesn’t work for them anymore,” Kelleher said. “It’s making it harder and harder for them to stay inside.”

Unhoused residents of Burien are challenging an ordinance passed in March by City Council members banning daytime camping in the Seattle suburb. The ban on daytime shelters also is part of Parke’s claim against Clarkston.

One of Clarkston’s City Council members refused requests from InvestigateWest for an interview. The others did not respond. In its ordinance, city officials justified the restrictions by citing “unsafe and unsanitary conditions” at encampments that pose a threat to the community.

Advertisement

Jennifer Graham, who grew up in Clarkston in a small, white house kitty-corner from Foster Park, said her daughter’s family, who now live there, can no longer enjoy the playground across the street at Foster Park. That’s the half-acre park where residents of “camp town” were forced to move in February after City Council members made it illegal to camp anywhere else.

“None of the kids in the neighborhood can play in the park because we’re not sure if there are needles lying in the grass,” Graham said. “And the kids that have gone over to try to play, they get hollered at by the homeless people.”

Graham started a Facebook group in March where she posts calls to Clarkston police about Foster Park, arrest reports, pictures and videos meant to persuade city leaders to bar camping from all parks. Rather than a shelter, she supports a community court system that would offer beds at mental health and addiction treatment centers for those who need it. And jail for those who refuse to comply.

An ordinance passed in February designated Foster Park as the only place for overnight camping in Clarkston and made it illegal to have a tent or temporary shelter set up between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Since then, police have issued 11 citations for trespassing at the park.

An ordinance passed in February designated Foster Park as the only place for overnight camping in Clarkston and made it illegal to have a tent or temporary shelter set up between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Since then, police have issued 11 citations for trespassing at the park.

Whitney Bryen / InvestigateWest

John Wolff, an attorney with the Northwest Justice Project who represents Parke and three other unhoused people, said Clarkston has as much of an obligation to his clients as it does to other residents. Attorneys on both sides are gathering evidence before arguing their case.

Advertisement

“My clients are all from Clarkston. They have families from there, and they deserve to be there, too,” Wolff said. “All they’re trying to do is assert their rights to basic survival that any human has the right to.”

A shrinking map

Parke’s breath turned to fog as he tugged on the strap that secures his tent to the top of his wagon on April 19. A nearby voice yelled, “Seven a.m. Everybody better get up!”

People sleeping in Foster Park have been cited by police if their shelters aren’t taken down by 7 a.m. Clarkston police have issued 11 trespassing citations at the park since the restrictions were passed, according to police records. Police cited seven people at 7:18 a.m. on March 11 — the day after clocks rolled forward one hour for daylight savings.

Even worse for some is the 8 a.m. deadline. That’s when the sprinklers come on. The park remains closed until noon, and tents and other temporary shelters are prohibited until 9 p.m.

But the city had some suggestions about where members of the encampment could relocate outside city limits: Hard-to-read black-and-white maps were handed out to residents, housed and unhoused, at a Feb. 6 meeting where the city acknowledged its lack of shelters. Hand-drawn black lines and barely visible computer-generated shapes encircled areas that the city said were available for camping. Many were along the river and managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which quickly closed those areas to prevent overnight camping.

Advertisement

“We’ve identified multiple public properties in the area that we believe also fall under the auspices of Martin vs. Boise,” City Administrator Steve Austin said at the meeting. “Those are properties in Idaho, properties in Washington that anybody that does not have a home is able to reside on without criminal prosecution.”

Parke has been cited twice for trespassing. Both times, he said he overslept. Both of Parke’s citations are misdemeanors that could carry up to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine, a major setback as Parke works toward financial and housing stability. He won’t know the consequence until he goes back to court next month. He worries he will end up back behind bars due to his past mistakes.

Since camping and shelter restrictions were passed, Clarkston’s homeless encampment has dwindled from 75 people to about 20. Those who remain are forced to move their belongings, creating piles of supplies in an alleyway near Foster Park.

Since camping and shelter restrictions were passed, Clarkston’s homeless encampment has dwindled from 75 people to about 20. Those who remain are forced to move their belongings, creating piles of supplies in an alleyway near Foster Park.

Whitney Bryen / InvestigateWest

In the late ‘90s, Parke began using methamphetamine to dull the symptoms of his undiagnosed mental illnesses, contributing to 20 years of criminal charges for bounced checks, driving violations, drug possession, failing to appear in court, unpaid fines and felony domestic abuse.

Parke said his mental health took a dive about two years ago, and he again turned to drugs. He lost his job and his home and ended up on the streets. He’s sober now and receiving treatment for borderline personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and manic depression.

Advertisement

“I let my mental health get the best of me. Hell, I let life get the best of me,” Parke said. “I’m trying to get back up and do the right thing and make it work, and it’s just, they’re making it harder and harder to improve my situation. Sometimes it’s hard not to give up.”

Clarkston’s ban sent some searching for a place to sleep across the river in Lewiston, Idaho, which barred sleeping in public more than a year before. Clarkston’s homeless population rose “drastically” after that, the mayor stated as part of the emergency proclamation adopted at the February meeting.

Vancouver, Washington, opens 3rd Safe Stay village for unhoused residents

Emergency shelter in the Lewis Clark valley is limited to youth and women who are victims of domestic abuse, volunteers said. Weeks after Clarkston’s restrictions went into effect, the Union Gospel Mission broke ground on a homeless shelter in Lewiston. But rules require residents to be sober and complete daily chores, and they prohibit co-ed housing, excluding many in need. Other attempts to build a shelter in Lewiston have failed due to public opposition.

On a corner overlooking Foster Park is First Christian Church, home of the Red Door Kitchen, which serves seven free meals a week. Its pastor, David Carringer, said he invited the mayor, City Council members and police to attend one of the meals. No one accepted the invitation.

Advertisement

“No one wants these people, so someone complains and they’re passed on to the next, and then they complain and they’re passed on again, and it’s a cycle,” Carringer said. “Instead of trying to come together and compromise, we’re pitted against one another, and the poorest always lose.”

Waiting for a decision

City camping bans, legal challenges, and the fate of people like Parke hinge on the decision of nine Supreme Court justices.

Last week, the court heard from both sides. Asking for a reversal of the Grants Pass decision, the city’s attorney argued that the previous ruling was too vague and hampered cities that need camping laws to protect public health and safety. The opposing attorney argued that those laws punish people for being homeless and “turn the city’s homelessness problem into someone else’s problem” by forcing them into other jurisdictions.

Justices are expected to rule in late June, near the end of the session.

Like the U.S. constitution, Washington’s constitution protects people against cruel and unusual punishment. It also contains a provision protecting people’s right to travel. Carrie Graf, an attorney with the Northwest Justice Project, argued to the Washington Supreme Court in October that the town of Lacey violated that provision when it passed a law requiring vehicles being used as shelter to move every four hours. The court has not yet ruled on the case.

Advertisement
An ordinance passed in February designated Foster Park as the only place in Clarkston where people who are homeless can sleep at night, but people must move all of their belongings every morning before the sprinklers go off, or risk being ticketed by police.

An ordinance passed in February designated Foster Park as the only place in Clarkston where people who are homeless can sleep at night, but people must move all of their belongings every morning before the sprinklers go off, or risk being ticketed by police.

Whitney Bryen / InvestigateWest

Graf said these and other provisions of the state constitution could insulate Washington from the fallout if the U.S. Supreme Court dismantles the 9th Circuit decisions.

While he waits for a local judge to decide his fate, Parke is applying for disability income. If that’s approved, he’ll apply for housing assistance. Until then, he’ll continue sleeping at Foster Park as long as the city permits.

“None of us want to be here, to be pointed at and laughed at and yelled at by people driving by,” Parke said. “The city put us front and center on purpose to create a circus and put us on display.”

Parke pulls his wagon toward an alleyway across from the park. The plastic tires on Parke’s wagon scrape against the gravel as he pushes it against a garage in an alleyway across from the park.

Advertisement

He makes three more trips from the park to the alley and back, each time with an armful of someone else’s belongings. Only a couple of tents remain when Parke glances up at the sun and mutters, “I hope it warms up soon.”

Surveying the grounds one more time, he crosses the street and takes a sip of Mountain Dew from a bottle he’d been toting around since the day before. He starts walking. He doesn’t know where he’s going, just that he can’t be there.

InvestigateWest (invw.org) is an independent news nonprofit dedicated to investigative journalism in the Pacific Northwest. Reach reporter Whitney Bryen at whitney@invw.org.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending