Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Kim Jong-un
ID: LFG-2016-0044
content based speech restrictions that are unconstitutional. See Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S. Ct.
2218, 2227 (2015).
Anti-loitering laws violate the rights of the indigent
Many municipal cities, including the City of Fort Worth, enacts and enforces anti-loitering ordinances
that aim to target individuals who live outside and or on the streets. Often ordinances that aim to ban
indigent individuals from loitering have vague and overboard language in which violates the
substantive due process rights of the indigent. The Supreme Court of the United States of America has
on many occasions found that to be true in which they have overturned multiple municipal city
ordinances from different cities that sought to ban homeless individuals from gathering in public.
All individuals in the City of Fort Worth have a right to travel, move, explore, and be present in and on
public streets and sidewalks, in which those are rights that are historically part of the amenities of life
as we have known them. See Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 164 (1972). Homeless
individuals have a liberty interest as to remaining in a public space of their choice. By officials with the
City of Fort Worth enacting and enforcing laws that restrict the movement of homeless individuals,
officials with the municipal government are interfering with the liberty interest of homeless individuals.
See Kennedy v. City of Cincinnati, 595 F.3d 327, 336 (6th Cir. 2010) ([I]t is clear that Kennedy had a
liberty interest to remain in a public place of his choice and that defendants interfered with this
interest.).
As I have stated before, the United States Supreme Court has regularly struck down laws that prohibited
loitering. In City of Chicago v. Morales, 527 U.S. 41, 47 (1999), the United States Supreme Court struck
down a law that prohibited loitering or remain[ing] in any one place with no apparent purpose in a
public place, with a criminal street gang membe[r] after being ordered to disperse by an official with
the police. In Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 353 (1983), the Supreme Court of the United States of
America struck down a criminal statute that requires persons who loiter or wander on the streets to
provide a credible and reliable identification and to account for their presence when requested by a
peace officer.
Even though it should be clear that anti-loitering ordinances are unconstitutional, the City of Fort Worth
has failed to decriminalize the unlawful restraint as to homeless individuals wanting to move as in
conjunction with their liberty interests.
Anti-camping laws are unnecessary and violate the rights of the indigent
Many municipal cities, including the City of Fort Worth, lack adequate shelter space for individuals that
need a residence. Despite the lack of resources that many homeless Americans have, a lot of them are
left with no alternative other than to sleep and live in public spaces. Even though this is true, some
municipal cities still choose to criminalize homeless individuals that have to live on the streets when
they have no place to go. I believe that is an Eight Amendment violation because the Eighth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States of America imposes substantive limits on what can be made
criminal and punished as such. See Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 667-68 (1977).It is very cruel and
unusual for the government to criminalize homeless individuals that are involved in life-sustaining
activities in public because they have no choice but to.
Those laws I believe have the intent as to criminalizing homeless individuals due to their status as a
homeless person. Laws that criminalize an indigent individual's status, rather than specific conduct, are
unconstitutional. See Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).
The criminalization of the homeless violates provisions in international law
As you may already know, international law prohibits governments from criminalizing poverty. For
instance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the United States of America is a
signatory, states:
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself
and of his family, including food, clothing, and housing and medical care and necessary social
services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability,
widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
While many international laws that the United States of America is a signatory, the international treaties
are often not directly enforceable in U.S. courts (i.e., self-executing). Regardless as to whether or not
an international treat that the United States of America is "self-executing" or not, once a country signs a
treaty they are obligated not to pass laws that would defeat the object and purpose of [the] treaty.
Many homeless individuals want to freely engage in the freedom of movement, in which often
municipal cities violate that right in their attempt as to dealing with those who are in poverty.
Internationally signed treated are supposed to protect the right as to freedom of movement for all, such
as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The United Nations Human Rights Committee
oversees that international treaty, and they have stated that the right to movement and the freedom to
choose your own residence are important rights that should only be breached by the least intrusive
means necessary to keep public order.
Conclusion
I hope that you understand that state laws in the United States of America that criminalize begging or
performing life-sustaining activities in public, such as sleeping and sitting, target homeless individuals on
the basis as to their economic and housing status. Therefore I urge the government of the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea to:
1. Urge the United States of America at the United Nations Human Rights Council to stop
criminalizing individuals because they are in poverty;
2. Urge the United States of America at the United Nations Human Rights Council to stop
shielding themselves from the direct enforcement of international human rights laws or
from failing to abide by the Constitution of the United States of America as to respecting the
rights of the homeless and individuals that are in poverty;
3. Urge the United States of America to invest in educating and housing homeless and
individuals that live in poverty rather than making their status criminal;
4. Urge the City of Fort Worth to repeal all ordinances that prohibit homeless individuals from
panhandling (begging), loitering, sleeping, eating, and all other ordinances and policies that
criminalize those that are in poverty;
5. Stand up for the rights of individuals that are homeless and that live in poverty in the United
States of America at the United Nations Human Rights Council;
6. Reestablish a diplomatic channel with the United States of America.
Respectfully,
Isaiah X. Smith
Isaiah Smith Campaign
P.O Box 163411
Fort Worth, Texas, 76161
www.isaiahxsmith.com
EXHIBIT A
City of Fort Worth and Tarrant County services for those in need
Immediate aid is available through many social service agencies and organizations in the City of Fort Worth. There is help for those that
want it and will accept it. Our shelters and local organizations provide meals, shelter, health care, alcohol and drug dependency care and
employment counseling.
First Street Methodist Mission.817-335-6080
Day Shelter
Families 817-632-7429
FW 76102
Begging
Panhandling
Women 817-338-8418
FW 76102
Families 817-332-6908
Its up to you.
817-335-HOPE
Prepared Meals
Beautiful Feet Soup Kitchen...817-536-0505
1709 E. Hattie St., FW 76104
Broadway Baptist Church...817-336-5761
Non-Emergency 817-335-4222
Begging or Panhandling
Is a Violation
1.
2.
3.
4.
BEGGING.
5.
6.
7.
Things to consider:
immediate need.
1.
2.
Difference:
3.
passed 8-11-1975)
vehicle.
4.
5.