Grants Pass 2

District Court Ruling and Appeal

• The district court ruled in favor of the City of Grants Pass on the enforcement of the anti-camping ordinances, but the appeals court vacated the summary judgment and remanded the case regarding the anti-sleeping ordinance.
• The purpose of vacating the summary judgment is to allow the court to re-examine the issue of the anti-sleeping ordinance.

Standing and Mootness

• The court reviews questions of standing and mootness to determine whether a plaintiff has the right to bring a lawsuit and whether the case is still relevant.
• Johnson is positioned to bring a pre-enforcement challenge against the park exclusion and criminal trespass ordinances because he has a plausible claim of injury.

Facts of the Case

• Logan sleeps in his truck just outside the Grants Pass city limits because he has nowhere else to go.
• Johnson was issued a citation for sleeping in Riverside Park during closed hours.
• Other individuals, including Martin, were cited for camping in a city park in 2019.
• The City of Boise argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the lawsuit.

Class Certification and Representative Parties

• One of the prerequisites for a member of a class to sue as a representative party is that the class member must personally satisfy the requirements of Article III standing.
• The four prerequisites for a member of a class to sue as a representative party are:
  • Numerosity: the class must be so large that individual litigation is impracticable.
  • Commonality: there must be questions of law or fact common to the class.
  • Typicality: the claims of the class representative must be typical of the claims of the class.
  • Adequacy: the class representative must be able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
• The court applies a deferential standard of review when reviewing a district court's order granting class certification.
• The court considers the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) when assessing the certification of a class.

Article III Standing and Requirements

• A plaintiff must demonstrate that they have suffered an injury in fact, that the injury is fairly traceable to the defendant's actions, and that the injury can be redressed by the court in order to have Article III standing.
• The City's argument regarding the plaintiffs' claims fails because the plaintiffs have demonstrated a plausible claim of injury.

Evidence and Enforcement

• Evidence is presented to show that enforcement of the ordinances continued after Martin, including citations issued to other individuals.
• The City's argument regarding the plaintiffs' claims is that the plaintiffs lack standing, but this argument fails because the plaintiffs have demonstrated a plausible claim of injury.

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

• Under Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a putative class representative must show that the class is numerous, that there are questions of law or fact common to the class, that the claims of the class representative are typical of the claims of the class, and that the class representative can fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
• Under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a class can seek injunctive relief or declaratory relief.
• In the context of the numerosity requirement under Rule 23(a)(1), "impracticability" means that individual litigation would be impractical or inefficient.