The Acton Institute is not only ok with the criminalization of the unhoused, they don’t think that anyone – especially the impoverished – have a right to housing

Just last month, the US Supreme Court made the decision that gave state authorities more power to dismantle the encampments of unhoused people in, with no guarantee that they will land anywhere more safe.

Many people, from Liberal, Progressive to left on the political spectrum refer to this as the criminalization of the unhoused. Indeed, we saw this play out in Grand Rapids in 2023, when the Grand Rapids City Commission decided to adopt 2 ordinances that would essentially criminalize those who are unhoused.

The two ordinances that the City of Grand Rapids adopted last year have to do with, 1) loitering, which they define as lingering or hanging around without any apparent purpose; and 2) People cannot be walking around downtown with personal property, which is exactly what those who are unhoused frequently do. It should also be noted that these ordinances were being pushed by the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce and other members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure.

Besides the GR Chamber of Commerce and their collaborators, there are other organizations in Grand Rapids that defend the US Supreme Court decision on criminalizing the unhoused. One such group is the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.

There was an article posted on the Acton Institute website from July 31st, with a headline that was phrased as a rhetorical question – Is It Now Illegal to Be Homeless?

The author of the Acton Institute article was Trey Dimsdale, who works as a lawyer for the First Liberty Institute, which is a Christian Right litigation group that primarily defends issues of religious liberty. Dimsdale makes the following arguments:

It is easy to assign blame for all the social ills that follow in the wake of gentrification, for example, on the middle-class residents of the new townhomes and high rises that have replaced less expensive, sometimes blighted neighborhoods. 

The housing problems in most of America’s large cities, it must be noted, are directly traceable to government regulation. 

It is a hard reality, but it is not altogether clear that anyone has a right to housing in the sense that anyone else has a duty to provide it. 

So, if cities do not ban camping in public spaces—for the homeless, for the Boy Scouts, and for commuters—does this mean that there is then a right to camp in these public spaces? 

Unfortunately, the root causes of homelessness are also the root causes of many antisocial behaviors that are threatening and dangerous. No one enjoys exposure to public urination, aggressive harassment, or intrusive and incoherent yelling. I’ve encountered all these things and more in nearly every city I’ve visited, and within just a few hundred yards of my front door in an urban area. 

Barring municipalities from imposing criminal penalties on the improper use of public spaces or antisocial behavior in public spaces for a certain class of person—namely those without shelter—does nothing but remove one of many tools that can ultimately be useful in helping homeless people and solving the complex and tragic problem of homelessness.

The entire argument presented by the Acton Institute writer is based on faulty assumptions and just plain cruelty. This should not surprise anyone, especially if you have been paying attention to the work of the Acton Institute over the years. The Acton Institute has consistently opposed policies that would benefit working class people and simultaneously support policies that benefit the business community and the capitalist class. 

In fact, the very pro-Capitalism message of the Acton Institute, is arguably a major contributing factor in the increased number of those who are unhoused and the millions of people who are housing insecure. You can’t be in favor of gentrification, the commodification of housing or the corporatization of the housing and rental market and then say that unhoused people don’t have a right to housing. Maybe it is time we organize an encampment in front of the Acton Institute building and draw attention to their brutally cold support of Capitalism!