The neglect of our mentally ill, severely addicted, and extremely poor neighbors is one of the greatest moral failures of our time. In cities across the United States, people in crisis are left to suffer in the streets, in emergency rooms, and in jails — not because they cannot be helped, but because we have chosen not to build the housing, care, and income supports that make recovery possible.
Now, instead of fixing that failure, President Trump’s recent Executive Order on homelessness aims to make it easier to forcibly institutionalize people. It directs the Department of Justice to roll back court precedents like Olmstead v. L.C., which protect the rights of people with disabilities to live in the most integrated setting possible. It encourages “maximally flexible” standards for civil commitment — vague language that could mean locking people away not for actual harm to others, but for being visibly poor or struggling to survive.
Let’s be clear: forced treatment without due process is not care. It is control. And we have been here before. In the mid-20th century, psychiatric hospitals across the country became warehouses where people were kept for years, often abused, and given no real path back to life in the community. We dismantled that system for a reason.
But here’s the thing: I’m also not here to pretend the current system is working. It isn’t. We have a massive deficit in housing for extremely poor people. The “Housing First” approach — in theory — recognizes that housing is the foundation for stability. And I agree with that. But too often, Housing First becomes “housing only,” without the ongoing support needed for people who’ve been on the street for years. I’ve watched friends get into an apartment through Housing First, only to lose it in a matter of months.
If we really want to reduce homelessness, we have to stop thinking there’s only one way to do it. I’m a believer in non-traditional, low-barrier options:
- Tent communities where people can live with dignity, privacy, and safety.
- Urban campgrounds with bathrooms, trash service, and outreach workers on-site.
- Safe parking and safe sleeping programs for people living in vehicles or needing a secure place overnight.
These options don’t replace permanent housing — they add to the menu of choices that meet people where they are, rather than where we think they should be. They create stability without coercion, and they cost a fraction of building new apartments.
We do not solve neglect by replacing it with incarceration. We solve it by building the systems — traditional and non-traditional — that should have existed all along. If we gave people real choices, if we stopped criminalizing poverty, and if we invested in housing, care, and income supports, we could significantly reduce homelessness without reviving the ugly history of locking people away.
It’s not complicated. It’s just humane.