Sacramento challenge to pause homeless encampment sweeps is moot, Ninth Circuit says

(CN) — A three-judge federal appeals panel on Friday ruled that because an injunction stopping the city of Sacramento, California, from relocating unhoused people expired last summer, the city's appeal before them was moot.

Attorneys for the city and the Sacramento Homeless Union argued the case Thursday before the Ninth Circuit panel. The judges indicated then that the issue might be moot, though both sides asked for a ruling.

“Because the preliminary injunction order of August 16, 2023, has expired, this appeal is dismissed as moot,” the judges state. “In light of the posture of the case below and the changing factual circumstances that may significantly impact the likelihood and scope of any future injunction, this appeal does not meet the standards for an exception to mootness.”

The homeless union has pushed back against Sacramento from relocating encampments for the past two summers. They have said that the city and Sacramento County displaced people from shaded areas during a 2021 heat wave. It filed suit in 2022, leading a federal judge that year and the following year to issue rulings prohibiting the local governments from relocating unhoused people during the hottest time of the year.

The federal judge cited high temperatures when he issued a two-week prohibition from moving homeless people on Aug. 3. He extended it mid-month, setting Aug. 31 as the expiration date.

The injunction allowed the city to take some action. It could remove garbage and other debris from encampments and keep four feet of sidewalk space clear. It also was allowed to enforce its critical infrastructure ordinance, which prohibits encampments on or near some spots.

Sacramento appealed the judge’s mid-month extension of the injunction to the Ninth Circuit. When the three-judge panel heard arguments on Thursday, the injunction had been expired for over six months.

“The court encourages the parties to pursue mediation,” the panel writes in its ruling.

Anthony Prince, an attorney for the homeless union, called the decision a victory.

“We’re pleased with this,” he said Friday afternoon. "We did a lot of work on the case.”

Prince said he anticipated the panel might find the issue moot. Doing so means the lower court’s injunctions, though expired, remain sound rulings. That makes them persuasive authority throughout the Ninth Circuit.

Reaching an agreement with Sacramento officials is also something Prince wants to work toward.

The underlying case is still moving through the system, Prince noted. He’d like to forge an agreement with city officials about how they approach the unhoused situation when temperatures are extreme.

Prince said there are 2,700 homeless people in Sacramento who are members of the union.

The lawsuit filed against Sacramento isn’t about the city’s policy of clearing encampments, Prince told the panel. Instead, it challenges moving people from areas where they are shielded from the heat.

An attorney for the city and county argued Thursday that the judges had no authority to stop the encampment sweeps. He called it a political and legislative issue, not a constitutional one. The sweeps seek to protect people’s health and safety — duties that shouldn’t be shelved.

A spokesperson for the city couldn’t be reached Friday afternoon.

The panel was composed of U.S. Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown, a Bill Clinton appointee; U.S. Circuit Judge Morgan Christen, a Barack Obama appointee; and U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra, based in Hawaii and sitting by designation.

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.

Email *

Submit