«
»

Philly’s Homeless Feeding Ban Is Being Taken To Federal Court

You know what they say, when sass and a papier mache head fail, take ‘em to court: The American Civil Liberties Union and the law firm Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing & Feinberg, have filed a federal lawsuit, “seeking to block new city rules that prohibit groups from feeding large numbers of homeless people in city parks.” According to The Inquirer, plaintiffs Chosen 300 Ministries, the Welcome Church, the King’s Jubilee, and Philly Restart claim the ban is a violation of their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion and free-speech (It probably is, but then again, isn’t everything?). The suit names The City of Philadelphia and Mayor Nutter as defendants.

We here at the Philebs are hoping this has its day in court, because every reason the city has given for the ban so far has been easily trumped by, “Why can’t I just give the dude a sandwich?” We’re gonna guess the whole case will be built around that.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 6th, 2012 at 9:05 am.

  • Guest

    This is the most ridiculous battle I’ve ever seen, and as a new resident to this city it is a clear illustration of why progress is painfully slow here.  The Mayor’s new law should be viewed as an everybody wins idea.  The homeless SHOULD be fed inside, and the city should be providing clean indoor facilities in which they can be fed.  They should not be fed outside at places like Love park, which should be one of many attractions to tourists that visit the city and help our economy.

    This is not Los Angeles.  The weather isn’t always nice here.  Why do we want the homeless to eat outside in the rain and cold weather?  Let’s look for good ways to feed and care for our homeless without interfering in the business that makes this city grow and progress.

  • arturo andersen

    if the city was providing this, then it would be a different story.  and a different city.

  • ice hockey is dangerous

    I agree that public feedings of the homeless are a threat to the city’s economy based on a recent study I invented in my brain.

  • Guest2

     They want the homeless to eat outside because they WANT to make it a spectacle. The city has offered them use of a building for the feedings, and these groups refused them.

    They’re far more concerned about tooting their own horn and feeling pious than in actually taking care of these people. And in the process, they’re creating a hazard for the neighbors and exploiting the homeless. It’s foul.

  • ice hockey is dangerous

    So your gripe with the public feedings are due to the “spectacle” being created, “horn tooting” and charitable people “feeling pious?”  You just described a mummer, (minus the charity part). None of these three characteristics are grounds for a law being created.  You have picked the only aspect of “pious” people worth defending: their desire to help others in need.