Does the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating public camping and sleeping constitute 'cruel and unusual punishment' prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution?

QUESTION PRESENTED Like many cities and towns across the country, the City of Boise, Idaho regulates camping and sleeping in public spaces to ensure that these areas remain safe, accessible, and sanitary for the continued use of residents, visitors, and wildlife. In this case, the Ninth Circuit held that Boise’s enforcement of such laws constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution when “there is a greater number of homeless individuals in [the jurisdiction] than the number of available beds [in shelters].” In the Ninth Circuit’s view, under this Court’s decisions in Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), and Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968), a “state may not ‘criminalize conduct that is an unavoidable consequence of being homeless.” The Ninth Circuit’s decision elicited multiple dissents from the denial of rehearing en banc, including a six-judge dissent emphasizing that other courts, including the Fourth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits, as well as the California Supreme Court, “have routinely upheld state laws regulating acts that were allegedly compelled or involuntary,” and warning that the decision will “prevent local governments from enforcing a host of other public health and safety laws, such as those prohibiting public defecation and urination.” The question presented is: Does the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating public camping and sleeping constitute “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution?