Rep. Farrah Chaichi and Rep. Khanh Pham, fierce advocates for human rights. Learn more about them on our blog.
The bill was killed after a convoluted and inequitable legislative process. This year, we’re asking for a fair hearing to ensure community voices are heard.
The fundamental difference between HB3115 passed in 2021 and the Right to Rest Act is the use of the term “objectively reasonable.” There is no common definition for objectively reasonable, which therefore leaves the interpretation up to each individual municipality - very similar to our current circumstances. The Right to Rest Act specifically details protected activities (those listed above) in the bill as well as the provision to allocate resources that went to policing those activities towards direct housing solutions. In addition to vague language regarding protected activities, this bill puts the onus on unhoused persons to litigate for their own rights. Lawsuits and appeals are arduous, costly, and highly inaccessible. This bill, in the guise of protecting legal actions, made it even more difficult to change laws that directly impact unhoused people. Read the bill language for HB3115 here.
Rest is essential to everyone’s health, well-being, and ability to function. Laws criminalizing rest not only exacerbate and cause physical and mental health issues, they are a human and civil rights violation. Decriminalizing rest must be our first step toward truly supporting our neighbors without housing.