Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Thursday, May 2, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

Judge rejects ACLU involvement in Phoenix homeless camp lawsuit

The American Civil Liberties Union sought to pause a lawsuit aiming to force the city to finish cleaning up a large homeless encampment until its federal case seeking the opposite is resolved.

PHOENIX (CN) — A Maricopa County judge on Friday denied the American Civil Liberties Union’s attempt to intervene in a case over how Phoenix cleans its largest homeless encampment, scolding the organization for waiting too long to jump in. 

“Proposed intervenors filed their motion just one business day prior to the final trial on the merits, after disregarding several milestones in the case in which they could have reasonably sought to intervene,” Judge Scott Blaney wrote in a Friday order

The ACLU filed its motion to intervene in Brown v. City of Phoenix on Thursday, asking Blaney to stay the trial, set to begin Monday, until its own case against the city is resolved. That case, brought against the city on behalf of Fund for Empowerment this past November, seeks to stop Phoenix from clearing tents and criminalizing camping on streets — antithetical to the intent of Freddy Brown and the 18 other residents and business owners in “the zone,” where nearly 1,000 homeless people have set up tents to live in.

Residents living or operating businesses between 7th and 16th avenues and from Washington to Jackson Street sued the city in superior court over the zone, claiming that Phoenix police gave up on enforcing laws in the multiblock encampment on the front lawn on the state capitol. Plaintiffs complained of violence and property damage, saying they often found needles and human waste near their homes and stores. 

Blaney already ordered the city to begin cleaning the zone in March; it’s gone block by block since May 10, clearing one section of street every two weeks. 

U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow, presiding over the federal case, told Phoenix this past December that it can only enforce camping bans if there are enough beds in city shelters to accommodate people removed from the street. He also enjoined the city from seizing people’s personal property without notifying them and holding any non-dangerous items to be claimed for at least 30 days. 

The ACLU asked Snow to find the city in contempt after the first cleanup, claiming it violated the December court order by destroying personal property and coercing people into overcrowded shelters with threats of arrest. Snow denied the motion, saying in a May 26 hearing that there wasn’t enough evidence to rule in the ACLU’s favor. 

Now, just three days before homeowners in the zone are to take the city to trial, the ACLU took another loss, this time unable to delay the outcome of a case that will further hinder their own objectives. 

Blaney chided the organization in his denial for trying to intervene so late in the case. He wrote out seven “examples of logical points in the present case at which proposed intervenors could have reasonably moved to intervene but failed to do so.”

Examples listed include the day the ACLU filed its federal lawsuit and the day Blaney set the final date for the trial, nearly three months ago.

“Instead of moving to intervene at any one of the logical, preceding milestones identified above, proposed intervenors, with full knowledge of the issues, arguments and relief sought in this court, waited until one business day prior to the final trial on the merits before seeking to intervene,” Blaney wrote. “The present motion is therefore untimely.”

Timeliness aside, Blaney likely would have denied the request to stay the case anyway, as he already denied Phoenix's identical request this past December. Leaving the trial indefinitely paused with no set end date would place undue burden on both parties, he reasoned. Without knowing when the federal lawsuit will be resolved, he wrote, it would therefore be unreasonable to hold off this trial in the meantime.

The trial is set for 9 a.m. Monday and is expected to last for three days. If he sides with the plaintiffs, Blaney will likely set a final date by which the remainder of the zone must be cleared. 

Follow @JournalistJoeAZ
Categories / Civil Rights, Regional

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...