Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, 2021
This Article examines how the treatment of domestic violence in New York’s civil and criminal l... more This Article examines how the treatment of domestic violence in New York’s civil and criminal legal systems places survivors and alleged abusers at risk of homelessness—on the one hand, it has been underplayed as a ‘bothersome’ nui- sance offense to landlords, while also serving as a basis for state-sanctioned evic- tions through the issuance of Orders of Protection. Section I incorporates client anecdotes to display how this issue has affected Bronx tenants during the pan- demic, explaining theoretical re-framings of domestic violence and providing context on how domestic violence rates in New York City have affected the home- lessness epidemic. Section II conducts a deeper dive into nuisance doctrine and the ways that New York tenants affected by domestic violence are entangled in civil judicial and administrative housing disputes. Section III discusses domestic violence prosecutions in criminal courts and the pitfalls that Orders of Protection present in curtailing alleged abusers’ housing rights. Section IV offers policy rec- ommendations to combat the impacts of local nuisance laws and Orders of Protection on survivors and alleged abusers, further acknowledging the impor- tance of transformative justice as an advocacy method to decriminalize domestic violence across the civil and criminal legal spectrum.
groups suffer the highest incidences of homelessness and have historically been the most suscepti... more groups suffer the highest incidences of homelessness and have historically been the most susceptible to land and property exclusion, displacement, eviction, and housing discrimination. 3 Gender-based subgroups, such as members of the LGBTQIA community, also suffer disproportionately higher rates of unsheltered homelessness and "may not be equally benefitting from government investments in solutions to homelessness." 4 Central to each account is the reality that one's experience of living unsheltered can, and often does, adversely affect their health, safety, and security. Living unsheltered can lead to higher rates of chronic disease (i.e., COVID-19, tuberculosis, and lung disease) and exacerbate pre-existing serious mental illness. 5 Living unsheltered also heightens one's risk of being physically or sexually victimized, robbed, or otherwise subjected to additional traumas. 6 This article examines the criminalization of people with mental health disabilities who experience homelessness, 7 incorporating various race and poverty factors associating housing with health. Section II critiques the judicial landscape of homelessness criminalization by first turning to the seminal decisions of Martin v. Boise and Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, which have shaped the past five years of homeless rights law and policy. It then assesses how the insufficient framework of the Equal Protection Clause of the federal Constitution limits courts' abilities to protect the rights of poor people experiencing homelessness and resolve related socioeconomic issues. Against this backdrop, Section III details the history of homelessness criminalization, focusing more narrowly on the criminalization of mental health and the emergence of involuntary civil commitments as a proxy of the criminal legal system. The section will address the involuntary mental health directive promulgated in New York City and California's CARE Act, showcasing the different legal standards governing the commitment processes of people with mental disabilities who experience homelessness in both locations, and the increased role of law enforcement as first responders. Our analysis of these
Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, 2021
This Article examines how the treatment of domestic violence in New York’s civil and criminal l... more This Article examines how the treatment of domestic violence in New York’s civil and criminal legal systems places survivors and alleged abusers at risk of homelessness—on the one hand, it has been underplayed as a ‘bothersome’ nui- sance offense to landlords, while also serving as a basis for state-sanctioned evic- tions through the issuance of Orders of Protection. Section I incorporates client anecdotes to display how this issue has affected Bronx tenants during the pan- demic, explaining theoretical re-framings of domestic violence and providing context on how domestic violence rates in New York City have affected the home- lessness epidemic. Section II conducts a deeper dive into nuisance doctrine and the ways that New York tenants affected by domestic violence are entangled in civil judicial and administrative housing disputes. Section III discusses domestic violence prosecutions in criminal courts and the pitfalls that Orders of Protection present in curtailing alleged abusers’ housing rights. Section IV offers policy rec- ommendations to combat the impacts of local nuisance laws and Orders of Protection on survivors and alleged abusers, further acknowledging the impor- tance of transformative justice as an advocacy method to decriminalize domestic violence across the civil and criminal legal spectrum.
groups suffer the highest incidences of homelessness and have historically been the most suscepti... more groups suffer the highest incidences of homelessness and have historically been the most susceptible to land and property exclusion, displacement, eviction, and housing discrimination. 3 Gender-based subgroups, such as members of the LGBTQIA community, also suffer disproportionately higher rates of unsheltered homelessness and "may not be equally benefitting from government investments in solutions to homelessness." 4 Central to each account is the reality that one's experience of living unsheltered can, and often does, adversely affect their health, safety, and security. Living unsheltered can lead to higher rates of chronic disease (i.e., COVID-19, tuberculosis, and lung disease) and exacerbate pre-existing serious mental illness. 5 Living unsheltered also heightens one's risk of being physically or sexually victimized, robbed, or otherwise subjected to additional traumas. 6 This article examines the criminalization of people with mental health disabilities who experience homelessness, 7 incorporating various race and poverty factors associating housing with health. Section II critiques the judicial landscape of homelessness criminalization by first turning to the seminal decisions of Martin v. Boise and Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, which have shaped the past five years of homeless rights law and policy. It then assesses how the insufficient framework of the Equal Protection Clause of the federal Constitution limits courts' abilities to protect the rights of poor people experiencing homelessness and resolve related socioeconomic issues. Against this backdrop, Section III details the history of homelessness criminalization, focusing more narrowly on the criminalization of mental health and the emergence of involuntary civil commitments as a proxy of the criminal legal system. The section will address the involuntary mental health directive promulgated in New York City and California's CARE Act, showcasing the different legal standards governing the commitment processes of people with mental disabilities who experience homelessness in both locations, and the increased role of law enforcement as first responders. Our analysis of these
Uploads
Papers by Siya U . Hegde