Alabama's Anti-Begging Laws Challenged Under First Amendment
Many people reading this right now may have personally felt the effects of rising housing costs and a lack of affordable housing. But some Americans are hit a lot harder than others: namely, those without a home.
The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2023 provides a comprehensive overview of homelessness trends in the United States. According to the data, between January 2022 and January 2023, homelessness rose by 12% nationally. On any given night in 2023, approximately 653,100 people, or 20 of every 10,000 people, were experiencing homelessness. This marks the highest number reported since 2007.
Alabama’s Unhoused Residents
Like many states, Alabama has a lot of unhoused residents. It’s estimated that just five years ago, about 3,261 people in Alabama experienced homelessness on any given day. Hundreds of those were families; hundreds were veterans; hundreds were young adults. Over eleven percent of them experienced chronic homelessness.
Three of them were Jonathan Singleton, Ricky Vickery, and Micki Holmes, residents of Montgomery, Alabama. They rely on panhandling, which involves soliciting donations in public spaces, to survive. Their typical signs display messages such as "homeless," "homeless and hungry," and "HOMELESS. Today it is me, tomorrow it could be you."
The 44-year-old Singleton has been homeless and panhandling in Montgomery since 2014. He suffers from multiple serious medical conditions, including kidney failure, chronic pancreatitis, and uncontrolled diabetes, which are exacerbated by his lack of stable housing and inability to afford health insurance. Fifty-six-year-old Vickery has been panhandling since 2018 because he lacks access to stable shelter and has found few support services for people experiencing homelessness in the city. Holmes, 38, also began panhandling in 2018, after he and his wife were evicted from a motel. His wife suffers from brain damage and seizures, and he panhandles to support her.
State Statutes Criminalize Begging
Two state statutes were making the lives of these three — and the thousands of other homeless Alabamans — even harder than you’d expect. State law, known as "the Begging Statute,” prohibits loitering “in a public place for the purpose of begging.” Another, sometimes called the Pedestrian Solicitation Statute, prohibits individuals from “standing on a highway for the purpose of soliciting contributions.”
Singleton, Vickery, and Holmes argue that the Begging Statute criminalizes their speech, as it targets individuals who are homeless and rely on panhandling, which involves soliciting donations in public spaces, to survive. They also contend that the Solicitation Statute similarly criminalizes their speech by restricting their ability to solicit donations, which they claim is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment.
Alabama enforces its laws against panhandling. Singleton, for example, has been arrested or cited six times under the Solicitation Statute and continues to panhandle despite fears of arrest, as he sees it as necessary for his survival. Vickery has been ticketed or jailed for panhandling fourteen times under the Solicitation Statute and once under the Begging Statute. Despite fears of future arrest, he continues to panhandle to meet his basic needs. Similarly, Holmes has been ticketed once for panhandling and threatened with arrest multiple times. Despite concerns about being jailed and leaving his wife without support, he continues to solicit charity due to their desperate need for help.
All three individuals face ongoing threats, harassment, and legal penalties for panhandling, which they rely on to subsist. They claim that the enforcement of statutes against begging and pedestrian solicitation poses significant barriers to their attempts to survive and exit homelessness. So, with the help of the Southern Poverty Law Center, he and his co-panhandlers challenged the Louisiana statutes on the grounds that they violate their First Amendment rights by criminalizing their speech.
Panhandlers Sue the State
The three unhoused Alabamans brought lawsuit against the City of Montgomery, secretary of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency Hal Taylor, and Montgomery County Sheriff Derrick Cunningham. They joined in a class action that represented the thousands of other residents in a similar position.
Their legal complaint involves a challenge to the constitutionality of the two statutes that criminalize begging and solicitation on highways. But their legal theory may not be the first you’d think of: the plaintiffs argue that these statutes violate their First Amendment rights by prohibiting them from asking for donations in public spaces.
More specifically, the plaintiffs claim that the statutes impose content-based restrictions on speech since they require law enforcement to examine the content of a person's speech to determine a violation. Such types of restrictions are presumptively in violation of the First Amendment. Charitable solicitation and begging, they claim, are protected forms of speech.
The plaintiffs also argue that the statutes act as a prior restraint on speech. The argument is that the statutes are prior restraints because they prohibit lawful speech and expressive activity in public spaces without a permitting process, which results in a blanket prohibition on their ability to panhandle. Prior restraint is generally considered unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The government cannot usually stop someone from saying or publishing something in advance, although there are some exceptions for matters like national security or obscenity. If the government wants to regulate protected speech like begging, the statutes would have to be more narrowly tailored, the plaintiffs argue.
Settlements and Proceedings
In 2020, soon after the lawsuit was brought, a settlement was reached between the City of Montgomery and Singleton. Montgomery agreed to cease enforcing the contested state statutes, forgive all outstanding fines and costs related to convictions under these laws, and contribute $10,000 to charitable initiatives supporting the homeless. However, this agreement was exclusive to the City of Montgomery, leaving litigation against other officials ongoing.
The legal proceedings continued against Hal Taylor and Derrick Cunningham. In 2022, a federal court certified the class and issued a preliminary injunction, temporarily halting Taylor and Cunningham from enforcing the solicitation statutes. Following this, Singleton and Cunningham reached a separate settlement, wherein Cunningham agreed to permanently desist from enforcing the laws in question.
In a decisive turn in 2023, the court delivered a final judgment against Taylor, declaring the statutes unconstitutional under the First Amendment and permanently barring him from enforcing the prohibition against panhandling—but this wasn’t the end of the legal saga. Taylor has since appealed the decision to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the case now awaits a final ruling on its merits.
11th Circuit to Decide
First Amendment Clinics at various law schools, law professors, and nonprofits, have recently filed their own Amici briefs on behalf of the plaintiffs for the 11th Circuit to consider. The briefs cite cases from other circuits (Second and Sixth) and courts that have struck down similar statutes that prohibit begging as unconstitutional.
Alabama defends its stance by claiming a historical justification for restricting begging, based on the notion that "beggars and vagrants... were considered 'paupers, and as such they forfeited all civil, political, and social rights.'" This suggests a historical view where individuals seeking alms were seen as having forfeited certain rights. The amici argue that this perspective is outdated and contrary to modern constitutional principles that protect free speech for all individuals, regardless of their socioeconomic status. The brief emphasizes that protecting the right to beg contributes to advocacy, raises awareness of societal issues like homelessness and poverty, and allows individuals to express their needs and circumstances.
A decision is expected later this year.
Related Resources:
- Should Housing Be a Right? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- The Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Criminalizing Homelessness (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
- The Homeless Vote: Can You Legally Cast a Ballot? (FindLaw's Learn About the Law)
