Editor’s Note: The following article was originally published by Robert Davis from Invisible People on February 18, 2026.
Advocates are urging East Lansing officials to reject a proposed camping ban that would fine or jail people experiencing homelessness, arguing the ordinance criminalizes basic survival instead of addressing the root housing crisis.
Proposed Ordinance Mirrors a Growing National Trend of Punishing Unhoused People Rather Than Investing in Housing Solutions
Advocates are speaking out against a proposed ordinance in East Lansing, Michigan, that would criminalize certain acts associated with homelessness.
In December, East Lansing’s city council introduced an ordinance that would prohibit people experiencing homelessness from setting up temporary shelter in public spaces, more commonly known as an urban camping ban. The proposed ordinance would enact civil penalties of a $200 fine or 30 days in jail for violations.
The policy is part of the local police chief’s efforts to reduce violence in downtown East Lansing, The State News reported. However, it has thus far faced significant pushback from community members and advocates alike.
Civil Rights Groups Warn the Ordinance Could Violate Constitutional Protections
The ACLU of Michigan, the National Homelessness Law Center (NHLC), and the Michigan Coalition Against Homelessness sent a letter to East Lansing’s political leadership on January 30, outlining their objections to the proposed ordinance. They argued that the city should reject the ordinance and invest in housing instead.
“Basic acts of survival should not be treated as crimes,” the advocates wrote in their 8-page letter. “There are a myriad of options for the city to employ that do not result in the criminalization of individuals experiencing homelessness for existing in public spaces. In fact, arresting people for merely sleeping outdoors is not permitted by the U.S. and Michigan Constitutions, and the repeated arrest and incarceration of the chronically homeless is both ineffective and costly.”
Local lawmakers delayed a final vote on the ordinance after receiving considerable pushback from community members and advocates during the February 2 city council meeting. The ordinance is expected to be revisited during the next meeting on February 17, The State News reported.
“Based on a lot of the feedback we’ve received tonight, I think there’s an opportunity to sit down, learn a little more, and make sure our ordinances are responsive to those concerns,” East Lansing City Manager Robert Belleman told the outlet.
How the Grants Pass Ruling Opened the Door to Laws Like This
Ordinances like the one proposed in East Lansing have become increasingly common since 2024, when the Supreme Court decided the Grants Pass v. Johnson case. The decision allowed cities to impose punitive measures to address homelessness, even when there is no adequate shelter available. The ruling overturned the Boise v. Idaho precedent from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which prohibited cities from using fines, fees, and arrests to remove people experiencing homelessness who have no access to shelter.
Since the Grants Pass decision was handed down, more than 300 cities across the country have introduced legislation to criminalize acts associated with homelessness, data from NHLC shows. Those include laws that prohibit people from sitting, lying down, or sharing food in public, as well as laws that make it a crime to build temporary shelters.
In their letter, advocates pointed out several aspects of East Lansing’s proposed law that could be legally suspect. For instance, they highlighted the “loitering” prohibition, which includes a definition of loitering that advocates described as “nebulous and arbitrary.”
They also argued that the ordinance seeks to criminalize acts generally considered innocent, such as taking shelter from the cold and spending time in public spaces. The Supreme Court has previously invalidated laws that criminalize similar acts that “by modern standards are normally innocent,” the letter noted.
“It’s also important to consider the principle of fairness,” the letter reads. “All of us may linger publicly. But for most, the consequence is a simple request to move, not legal penalties. Our unhoused neighbors deserve the same grace.”
Why Criminalization Harms People and Costs Taxpayers More
Criminalizing homelessness has become the preferred way for local governments to address homelessness over the last several decades. Police departments have been issuing move-along orders and sweeping encampments since the 1980s, when America’s unsheltered homelessness crisis began to explode.
Even though these acts are common, they are no less dangerous for people who are homeless. Studies have found that sweeping encampments can increase overdose rates for people with substance abuse issues. They also significantly disrupt an individual’s support system and can make it more difficult for people to exit homelessness into housing by destroying an individual’s identification or other necessary paperwork.
On top of the personal dangers, experts say criminalizing homelessness is also a waste of taxpayer money. Cities spend millions of dollars every year to have police and sanitation workers sweep encampments, money that could otherwise go toward building more supportive housing and services. These operations also increase the likelihood that a person experiencing homelessness will be arrested or need to use emergency services, both of which add to the total cost to taxpayers.
Advocates Call for Housing and Services Instead of Punishment
Advocates called on East Lansing officials to kill the ordinance and instead divert funding toward housing and voluntary services.
“Homelessness ends with a home,” the letter reads. “No single policy will end homelessness overnight, but Housing First as a policy framework, working in tandem with other supportive policies, can help to reduce the inflow into homelessness, and make it easier for individuals and families to exit. A well-resourced and strategic housing plan will reduce or eliminate the need for encampments, arrest, adjudication, and other costly taxpayer expenses, both of which will ultimately eliminate encampments by eliminating the need for encampments.”
Wave of Anti-Homeless Laws Continues Gaining Momentum
With the Supreme Court’s gutting of essential protections for homeless people, our work is more critical than ever. Nationwide, anti-homeless laws are gaining ground in legislative committees, fueled by hidden votes, corporate backing, out-of-state lobbyists, and conservative think tanks like the Cicero Institute. We’re fighting a crucial battle against misinformation and the criminalization of homelessness.
The pandemic underscored the urgent need to overhaul housing policies in the United States, revealing that many homelessness initiatives rely too heavily on law enforcement rather than social services.
Stand with our vulnerable neighbors and urge your representatives to take meaningful action to address homelessness. As the first step toward ending homelessness, we must prioritize compassionate solutions over punitive measures.
Tribuno del Pueblo brings you articles written by individuals or organizations, along with our own reporting. Bylined articles reflect the views of the authors. Unsigned articles reflect the views of the editorial board. Please credit the source when sharing: tribunodelpueblo.org. We’re all volunteers, no paid staff. Please donate at http://tribunodelpueblo.org to keep bringing you the voices of the movement because no human being is illegal.
