The only certainty that can be taken from the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to not hear the appeal in the Boise, ID, Martin case concerning sleeping on sidewalks is the Times' bias and myopia.
While the Martin Decision stands in the nine western states, municipalities in the 41 other states are free to enforce "no sleeping on a sidewalk" ordinances, a fact the Times failed to report. Failure to grant certiorari is not a ruling on the merits of an appeal and, despite your front page headline, the court did not say a word about housing. Actually, the court said nothing and any interpretation amounts to reading tea leaves. The court may simply be waiting for an appeal from another circuit or one with a clearer delineation of the issues. Further, there is nothing in the court's action that precludes cities in the Ninth Circuit from adopting limits on where sleeping on public property is acceptable, such as banning sidewalk encampments within 300 feet of residences.
Mark Ryavec, President, Venice Stakeholders Association
And this is what the Times ran on December 21st: