Last month, the Supreme Court announced it would hear a case that, at first glance, may appear to have little importance to Californians.
After all, Grants Pass v. Johnson concerns an Oregon city boasting a population of only 40,000 and commanding none of the cultural importance of Portland, Salem or even Eugene. But Grants Pass is about to throw California’s racial politics into a state of upheaval.
Why? The case concerns whether or not cities can legally punish homeless people for sleeping on public land.
California’s housing crisis is no secret. According to federal data, we have 181,399 homeless individuals in our state. That makes California home to the largest homeless population, the largest percentage of the nation’s homeless population, and — critically for the Grants Pass case — nearly half (49%) of all unsheltered homeless individuals in the United States.
In California, 68% of its homeless population is unsheltered.
These numbers are disturbing regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. But here in California, homelessness is undoubtedly a racial issue. Black Californians, who make up around 7% of the population, represent 26% of homeless people in the Golden State. One-third of homeless Californians over 50 are Black. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the city of Grants Pass, it will be older Black people without homes, nearing or past retirement age, who suffer most.
How did we get here? No discussion of homelessness and race can ignore the long history of redlining. The explicitly discriminatory financial rules associated with this practice were designed to lock Black people out of the housing market in white neighborhoods. This, in turn, prevented Black people from building the generational wealth that has powered so much of California’s economic growth to date.
Neither can we overlook downzoning, a process that occurred across many California cities, particularly in the 1970s. In order to prevent new population growth — especially among Black and Latino communities — cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and others capped the construction of new housing units. This ensured that California’s Black residents could not move into white neighborhoods and white townships, confining them to slums.Â
Recommended for you
In large part, this is why California remains so segregated today. Black Americans, along with other minority groups, had the door slammed in their faces right when they tried to climb out of poverty. The rules that had facilitated the accumulation of wealth for white Americans were abruptly changed, leaving Californians of color out in the cold.
Homelessness skyrocketed. Fast-forward to 2024, and the problem has only deepened. Â
What is the solution? We cannot simply wish away the legacies of downzoning and redlining. But we can remake them by destroying the barriers that still deprive so many Black Americans of affordable housing. Many steps must be taken to tackle racial disparities in health care, education and policing — disparities that are often heightened for Black women.
But the first step relates to housing. The tools that have kept Black Californians locked out of housing must be dismantled. New, affordable housing must be built — and made available to people of color — fast. San Francisco, for example, spent 18 months deciding whether it would potentially enable displacement to allow housing on a Nordstrom valet parking lot. Such delays are unacceptable.
As a Black man from Oakland, I understand the fear of gentrification and displacement at the hands of greedy developers who don’t care about the community. After all, it was often Black and brown neighborhoods that were bulldozed for the highways.
But the homelessness crisis is severe, and people need places to live. Demand cannot be wished away. We cannot afford 18-month delays to construction. People in the present cannot live in hypothetical future housing — and now, thanks to the Supreme Court, the clock is ticking faster than ever.
Jackson Huston is an undergraduate student at UC Davis. He is the winner of the 2024 UC Davis Center for Poverty and Inequality Research Black History Month Student Essay Contest, from which this commentary was adapted.

(10) comments
Interesting perspective, Mr. Huston, but perhaps we need to take a closer look at some of your statistics. You say black Californians make up around 7% of the population and represent 26% of homeless people. But does this 26% consist of non-resident Californians? And if so, what percentage? Although you’re concentrating on black Americans and their homelessness, how about other demographics, or veterans? And how are they able to avoid the disparities you’re discussing? Not everyone has generational wealth.
The homelessness crisis is severe but instead of saying people need places to live and hoping someone can wave a magic wand or spend $trillions, we need to address why it costs so much to build. Reference the FEATURED article from Alyse DiNapoli (https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/will-impact-fee-reform-come-to-the-peninsula/article_68bd5fb2-d061-11ee-aa22-6b56cef59c64.html) highlighting a major reason, development fees, cities attempt to extort (perhaps too strong a word) from developers to explain why housing and rental prices are so high in the Bay Area. Developers need to recoup their additional costs after paying out these extortive and excessive fees and guess who will reimburse them? New home buyers or renters. Happy Leap Day!
Terence - I have it from very reliable sources that many developers have given up on building anything in California. This is mostly because of the outrageous fees, Title 24 and natural gas use restrictions. Couple that with PG&E not being able to even find the manpower and equipment to connect new construction to its grid, while demanding rate increases for non-existent infrastructure projects, one should not wonder why little interest remains to build here. State and local regulations have killed the golden goose.
Dirk, thanks for the information. I can’t say I’d be surprised, with cities attempting to extort more and more impact fees, while pushing for modifications and features such as installing mandatory electric car chargers (some which may never be used by the owner), low-water or no-water toilets, all electric appliances, etc. Builders aren’t tossing in those features for free and will pass on the cost to homebuyers. With the constant drumbeat to increase wages, accelerating raw materials costs, and high inflation, these only increase overall costs that impact development.
Cities have to pay for the bloated salaries, benefits and pensions of union city workers.
Why does it appear that only the people of color struggle to climb out of their situations? Could it be due to 70% fatherless households, with many non existent mothers as well and then black children are raised on the street and or by grandparents?
Yes, racism was awful, but the war on poverty which started in 1960's did not help and things have gotten worse for the black community. Yes racism still exists today, but it as prevalent as democrats want people to believe, See Barrack Obama being elected TWICE as President of the U.S. Racism is simply a card that the left uses to create victims, people of color, and villains, white privileged and Asian students applying for Ivy League schools.
Of the 9,468 murder arrests in the US in 2017, 53.5% were black and 20.8% Hispanic. 72.2% of players in the NBA are black. 40% of women who get abortions in the U.S. are Black. In 2022 there were 737 homicides in Chicago. 78% of the victims were Black, 18% were Hispanic, 5% were white/other.
Statistics can tell a lot, but the breakdown of the nuclear family for blacks is the number one root cause and the very reason things have not changed for the black community.
Terence: Your first graph is right on target. Facts are facts but what you conclude from them is opinion. Why don't reporters ask the right questions ... such as you pointing out "how about other demographics."
Mr. Houston, In a state of around 40 Million, what are the breakdowns for the percentages you are using.
Also, including a breakdown asked by Terrance on Homeless Californians vs Non California Homeless.
Why don't you use the Google machine to answer your questions about statistics?
https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/06/22/how-many-of-californias-homeless-residents-are-from-out-of-state/
Oh yeah, it's because you and Terence Y and Dirk are more interested in shutting down the conversation than digging into it. Classic tactic of people (dare we say right-wingers?) who would rather continue with their transparent line/lie that there is more poverty among people of color not because of a long history of systemic racism but because there must be something inherently lazy or stupid about them.
Westy - the moment that you throw in the race card, the conversation stops. My personal point is that past mistreatment cannot be an excuse for not taking advantage of opportunities that are available to all, regardless of race, ethnicity or IQ scores. But, Westy you are determined to make sure that certain demographics remain disadvantaged through your frequent reminders, even if it is not the case. Who gave you that authority anyway?
Westy, thanks for doing some homework. Instead of your usual outrage and tossing out ad hominem attacks, perhaps you can add to a conversation, or add some knowledge. Even a few conclusions based on the article... For instance, the article says 82% of those surveyed reported a time in their life when they had a serious mental health condition and nearly two-thirds reported having regularly used hard drugs. They report Black and Native Americans are dramatically over-represented compared to the general population but is this because these folks have a higher incidence of mental health conditions or using hard drugs?
Also, the only person mentioning lazy or stupid in this thread is you and if that’s what you infer from what some folks write, that’s on you (maybe that's a classic tactic of people - dare we say left-wingers?). And rather than shutting down conversations, I read contributors making observations, some astute, that you’ve apparently skipped over while you were busy seeing red. If you’re so fervent about the issue, perhaps you can tell us what you personally are doing, such as taking in a homeless person or family. Or let us know whether you agree or disagree with some of the observations, and why, instead of instead of railing on your fellow contributors and making baseless accusations.
Thanks Jackson for an informative analysis. It's not as if redlining and downzoning are ancient history. And as you say, the barriers that still deprive so many Black Americans of affordable housing are still very much in evidence.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.