President Trump on Thursday signed an govt order making it simpler for cities and states to take away homeless folks from the streets and get them remedy elsewhere. The order additionally calls on Legal professional Common Pam Bondi to “reverse judicial precedents and finish consent decrees that restrict state and native governments’ skill to commit people on the streets who’re a threat to themselves or others,” in response to a White Home reality sheet.
On the floor, it’s framed as an answer — however beneath, it represents a troubling growth of compelled institutionalization, with few actual solutions about long-term care or housing.
Trump’s latest govt order on homelessness, which prioritizes compelled relocation of unhoused folks to remedy facilities and penalizes open-air encampments, reads extra like a marketing campaign tactic than a compassionate or efficient public coverage. Whereas public frustration round homelessness is comprehensible, this order channels that frustration within the mistaken path — focusing on signs as a substitute of causes, and folks as a substitute of programs.
Framing homelessness as a menace to public security relatively than a humanitarian disaster isn’t solely harmful — it’s inaccurate.
White Home Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt mentioned, “By eradicating vagrant criminals from our streets the Trump Administration will be certain that Individuals really feel protected…”
This sort of language paints unhoused folks as violent offenders, regardless of research — like one from the College of Central Florida — exhibiting that unhoused people are sometimes arrested for nonviolent infractions like public intoxication or shoplifting, not for violent crime. The truth is, analysis reveals they’re way more prone to be victims of violence than perpetrators.
Trump’s strategy to homelessness depends on institutionalization, encampment sweeps, and prioritizing states that crack down on out of doors sleeping. Nevertheless it provides no actual funding in constructing or preserving reasonably priced housing — which consultants throughout the political spectrum agree is the core difficulty. Jesse Rabinowitz of the Nationwide Homelessness Legislation Middle mentioned it finest: “Trump’s anticipated actions are reckless, costly, and make homelessness worse… Actual leaders deal with options, not on kicking folks when they’re down.”
Supporters of the order argue that it will get folks into remedy, however compelled remedy not often results in long-term restoration — particularly when it’s divorced from secure housing. Analysis has persistently proven that Housing First, which prioritizes inserting folks in everlasting housing earlier than mandating remedy or sobriety, reduces homelessness by as much as 88 p.c and lowers expensive emergency care visits. The issue isn’t that Housing First failed — it’s that we’ve underfunded and inconsistently utilized it throughout the nation.
This order additionally disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities, LGBTQ folks, and folks with disabilities — teams who’re already overrepresented within the unhoused inhabitants. And in cities like D.C., the place Trump is directing federal companies to evict folks from public parks, the transfer will merely push folks out of sight, additional away from providers and case managers.
A couple of high-profile, tragic incidents involving homeless people shouldn’t dictate nationwide coverage. Worry shouldn’t be driving our response to poverty. If we would like actual outcomes, we’d like actual options: housing, psychological well being entry, wraparound providers — and most significantly, humanity.
Homelessness isn’t a criminal offense. And treating it like one gained’t resolve it.
Lindsey Granger is a Information Nation contributor and co-host of The Hill’s commentary show “Rising.” This column is an edited transcription of her on-air commentary.