nuclear tourist by george johnson

Nuclear Tourism

You can read George Johnson 's full article and see more photos from his trip at this link: The Nuclear Tourist and also in the October print issue of National Geographic.

On April 26 th , 1986, shortly after 1am, Reactor Four at the Chernobyl nuclear power complex experienced a sudden, and catastrophic, power surge. The accident set off a series of explosions, a fire, and released massive amounts of radioactive material into the environment.  Within months of the meltdown, twenty eight workers died from radiation and more than 350,000 people were relocated. Over the ensuing years, related deaths have been harder to pin down, with estimates ranging from 4,000 to over 200,000. 28 years later, it is a tourist destination. George Johnson recently visited Chernobyl, and its surrounding villages, he spoke with Virginia about his trip. You can listen to the segment below.

The following is an excerpt from The Nuclear Tourist from the October issue of National Geographic magazine:

"At first they came to scavenge, later for the thrill. They drink from the Pripyat River and swim in Pripyat bay, daring the radiation and the guards to get them. A stalker I met later in Kiev said he’d been to Chernobyl a hundred times. “I imagined the zone to be a vast, burnt-out place—empty, horrible,” he told me. Instead he found forests and rivers, all this contaminated beauty.

Our tour group walked along the edge of a bone-dry public swimming pool, its high dive and racing clock still intact, and across the rotting floor of a gymnasium. Building after building, all decomposing. We visited the ruins of the Palace of Culture, imagining it alive with music and laughter, and the small amusement park with its big yellow Ferris wheel. Walking up 16 flights of steps—more glass crunching underfoot—we reached the top of one of the highest apartment buildings. The metal handrails had been stripped away for salvage. Jimmied doors opened onto gaping elevator shafts. I kept thinking how unlikely a tour like this would be in the United States. It was refreshing really. We were not even wearing hard hats.

From the rooftop we looked out at what had once been grand, landscaped avenues and parks—all overgrown now. Pripyat, once hailed as a model Soviet city, a worker’s paradise, is slowly being reabsorbed by the earth. "

You make NHPR possible.

NHPR is nonprofit and independent. We rely on readers like you to support the local, national, and international coverage on this website. Your support makes this news available to everyone.

Give today. A monthly donation of $5 makes a real difference.

• Google Plus

• Business & Markets

You are here

The nuclear tourist an unforeseen legacy of the chernobyl meltdown.

They say that five sieverts of radiation is enough to kill you, so I was curious to see the reading on my Russian-made dosimeter as our tour van passed into the exclusion zone—the vast, quarantined wilderness that surrounds the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine.

Thick stands of pines and birches crowded the roadside as our guide reminded us of the ground rules: Don’t pick the mushrooms, which concentrate radionuclides, or risk letting the contaminants into your body by eating or smoking outdoors. A few minutes later we passed the first of the abandoned villages and pulled over to admire a small band of wild Przewalski’s horses.

Twenty-eight years after the explosion of a nuclear reactor at Chernobyl, the zone, all but devoid of people, has been seized and occupied by wildlife. There are bison, boars, moose, wolves, beavers, falcons. In the ghost city of Pripyat, eagles roost atop deserted Soviet-era apartment blocks. The horses—a rare, endangered breed—were let loose here a decade after the accident, when the radiation was considered tolerable, giving them more than a thousand square miles to roam, according to the National Geographic.

A few minutes later we reached Zalesye, an old farming village, and wandered among empty houses. Broken windows, peeling paint, crumbling plaster. On the floor of one home a discarded picture of Lenin—pointy beard, jutting chin—stared sternly at nothing, and hanging by a cord on a bedroom wall was a child’s doll. It had been suspended by the neck as if with an executioner’s noose. Outside, another doll sat next to the remains of a broken stroller. These were the first of the macabre tributes we saw during our two days in the zone. Dolls sprawling half dressed in cribs, gas masks hanging from trees—tableaux placed by visitors, here legally or otherwise, signifying a lost, quiet horror.

Farther down the road we were surprised by an inhabitant. Dressed in a scarf, a red sweater, and a winter vest, Rosalia is one of what officials call the “returnees”—stubborn old people, women mostly, who insist on living out their lives in the place they call home. She seemed happy for the company. Prompted by our guide, she told us of worse hardships. The lands around Chernobyl (or Chornobyl, as it is known in Ukraine) are part of the Pripyat Marshes on the eastern front, where the bloodiest battles of World War II were fought. She remembers the German soldiers and the hardships under Stalin.

  Most Important Human Advance

“You can’t see radiation,” she said in Ukrainian. Anyway, she added, she is not planning to have children. She lives with five cats. Before we departed, she showed us her vegetable garden and said her biggest problem now is Colorado potato bugs.

There is something deeply rooted in the human soul that draws us to sites of unimaginable disaster. Pompeii, Antietam, and Treblinka—all eerily quiet now. But in the 21st century we hold a special awe for the aftermath of nuclear destruction. The splitting of the atom almost a hundred years ago promised to be the most important human advance since the discovery of fire. Unleashing the forces bound inside atomic nuclei would bring the world nearly limitless energy. Inevitably it was first used in warfare, but after Hiroshima and Nagasaki a grand effort began to provide electricity “too cheap to meter,” freeing the world from its dependence on fossil fuels.

Then there is the specter of nuclear meltdown. In 2011, Chernobyl, site of the world’s worst catastrophe at a nuclear power plant, was officially declared a tourist attraction.

Nuclear tourism; coming around the time of the Fukushima disaster, the idea seems absurd. That is precisely what drew me, along with the wonder of seeing towns and a whole city—almost 50,000 people lived in Pripyat—that had been abandoned in a rush, left to the devices of nature.

  Contagious Land

The other diehards in the van had come for their own reasons. John, a young man from London, was into “extreme tourism.” Gavin from Australia and Georg from Vienna were working together on a performance piece about the phenomenon of quarantine. We are used to thinking of sick people quarantined from the general population. Here it was the land itself that was contagious.

Of all my fellow travelers, the most striking was Anna, a quiet young woman from Moscow. She was dressed all in black with fur-lined boots, her long dark hair streaked with a flash of magenta. It reminded me of radioactivity. This was her third time at Chernobyl, and she had just signed up for another five-day tour later in the year.

“I’m drawn to abandoned places that have fallen apart and decayed,” she said. Mostly she loved the silence and the wildlife—this accidental wilderness. On her T-shirt was a picture of a wolf.

“ ‘Radioactive Wolves’?” I asked. It was the name of a documentary I’d seen on PBS’sNature about Chernobyl. “It’s my favorite film,” she said.

In the early hours of April 26, 1986, during a scheduled shutdown for routine maintenance, the night shift at Chernobyl’s reactor number four was left to carry out an important test of the safety systems—one delayed from the day before, when a full, more experienced staff had been on hand.

Within 40 seconds a power surge severely overheated the reactor, rupturing some of the fuel assemblies and quickly setting off two explosions. The asphalt roof of the plant began burning, and, much more threatening, so did the graphite blocks that made up the reactor’s core.

A plume of smoke and radioactive debris rose high into the atmosphere and began bearing north toward Belarus and Scandinavia. Within days the fallout had spread across most of Europe.

An excerpt from an article by George Johnson for the National Geographic.

Add: No. 108 - Qaem Maqam Farahani St. Tehran, Iran

Tel: (+98 21) 42710103

Fax: (+98 21) 42710102

• Advertisement
• Subscription
• Republishing Guidlines

. . . . . .

Subscribe to our daily newsletter.

More from DEN Media Group:

Donya-e-Eqtesad Daily

Tejarat Farda

EghtesadNews

DEN Publication

DEN Training Center

Donya-e-Bourse

© Financial Tribune Daily and Contributors 2014-2018

Fiancialtribune.com

• Latest News
• National and Politics
• Iran-Europe Relations
• US Withdrawal from JCPOA
• Agriculture
• Iran Economic Growth
• Foreign Investment in Iran
• Iran Foreign Trade
• Gold and Currency
• Iran Steel Market
• Real Estate
• Tehran Stock Exchange
• Natural Gas
• Iran Oil News
• Iran Petrochemical Industry
• Renewable Energies in Iran
• South Pars Gas Field
• Iran Petroleum Contract (IPC)
• Iran Tourism Statistics
• Iran Travel Blog
• Iran Travel FAQs
• Health and Medical Tourism
• Iran Auto Exports
• Iran Auto Imports
• Iran Science and Technology

• 1. Black Americana Handmade Items
• 2. Black Americana Kitchen Decor
• 3. Black Americana Salt and Pepper Shakers
• 4. Black Americana Misc. Items
• 5. Black Americana Reproductions
• 1. Vintage Candle Holders
• 2. Vintage Glassware
• 3. Vintage Green Glass
• 4. Vintage Home Decor Complete Wall Art Displays
• 5. Vintage Misc. Items
• Flower Girl Baskets
• Vintage Purses
• Vintage Thimbles
• Vintage Tins
• Vintage Wall Decor
• Wicker and Baskets
• Vintage Baskets
• Mom's Vintage Collection
• CEILING FAN BLADES and SAW BLADES Wall Art
• 1. Decorative PLUNGERS
• 2. Flour Sack Tea Towels
• 3. Painted Book Pages
• 4. For the Men in Our Life
• 5. Handmade By My DAD
• 6. Handmade Lampshades
• 7. Hand Painted Glassware
• 8. Hand Painted Mugs
• 9. Hand Painted Trays
• 10. Hand Painted Vases
• 11. Upcycled Chalkboards
• 12. Upcycled Clipboards
• 13. Handmade DISCOUNTED Imperfections
• 1. BUNDLES - Digital Graphic Download
• 2. License Plate Digital Graphic Design
• 3. Personalized License Plate Digital Graphic Designs
• 4. Mugs – Digital Graphic Designs
• 4 A. TUMBLERS - Digital Graphic Designs
• 5. Garden Flag Digital Graphic Designs
• 5 A. BORDERS and FRAMES
• 5 B. ROUND Digital Graphic Designs
• 5 C. JUST GRAPHICS - Country and Floral
• 6. Toilet Paper Digital Designs
• 7. Tote Bag Digital Graphic Designs
• 8. Bumper Stickers and Window Digital Graphic Designs
• 9. NEW Digital Graphic Design NUMBER SETS
• 10. NEW Digital Graphic Design ALPHABET SETS
• 11. FAITH Graphic Designs
• 12. SPANISH Designs
• 1. Bathroom - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 2. Faith - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 3. Holiday - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 4. Kitchen - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 5. Positive Saying - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 6. Miscellaneous - Ceramic Tile Collection
• 7. OOPS...Minor BooBoos in Handmade Items
• 1. Ceramic Tile Collection
• 2. Framed Sayings
• 3. Plate Wall Art
• 4. Scrabble Items
• 5. Wood Signs
• 1. Miscellaneous Car License Vanity Plates
• 2. Motorcycle Vanity License Plates
• 3. Personalized Vanity License Plates
• 1. Cottage Chic Home Decor
• 2. Wall Shelves and Organizers
• 3. Wicker and Baskets
• 4. Flower Girl Baskets
• 5. Vintage Baskets
• 6. Odds and Ends
• 7. SpongeBob Collection
• 1. Holiday Items
• 2. Vintage Santas
• 3. Holiday Ornaments
• 1. Teacher Digital Downloads
• 1. Craft Books
• 2. Frames for Your DIY Projects
• 3. Vintage Painting Patterns
• 4. Wood Cutouts and Other Wooden Items
• M. FREE TEACHER STUFF
• 1. Animals and Insects
• 4. Holidays
• 5. Mandala Art
• 7. Paper Dolls
• 8. Reading and Language Arts
• 10. Vintage
• All Products
• Mom's Vintage Collection
• All About JAM
• Store Policy
• Shipping Policy
• Social Media
• Contact JAM
• JAMs Creative Blog
• JAMs DIY Blog
• JAMs For Teachers Only Blog
• Unique Christmas Gifts
• Do You Have a Tradition for YOUR Family at the Christmas Season? I Do…
• What Do YOU Do In Your Spare Time That Makes You Happy?
• Hey…What Are YOU Doing With Those Crates Lying Around Over There?
• Do They Still Ask If YOU Want Paper or Plastic?
• Are YOUR Doilies Tucked Away and Out of Sight?
• Changing A Lampshade Can Change the Whole Look of a Room
• Where Are My Wine Buddies?
• Are YOU A Collector of Old Books? (updated 11/9/17)
• Do YOU Happen to Have an Old Mattress Lying Around?
• What to Do With All of Those Vintage Wooden Hangers?
• How Do YOU Display All of YOUR Awesome Vintage Tins? (UPDATED 11/22/17)
• What Would You Do With These?
• Knife Block Up-Cycling...
• Do You Sell Vintage Costume Jewelry?
• One Month In...NEW Store Vintage and Handmade
• The Excitement of Opening a NEW Store...JAMsCraftCloset.Com
• Create account

JAMsCraftCloset - The Place To Shop For That Just Because I LOVE YOU Gift...

• All Collections

My Perspectives English I UNIT 5 THE NUCLEAR TOURIST George Johnson Teacher Supplemental Resources Student Activities

• Description

My Perspectives English I

The nuclear tourist, by:  george johnson, teacher supplemental resources lesson plans activities vocabulary student approved, share this product, more from this collection.

THE WIFE'S STORY By Ursula K. Le Guin Digital Lesson Teacher Resource With Supplemental Activities HAPPY TEACHING

THE TEST By Theodore Thomas Digital Lesson Teacher Resource With Supplemental Activities HAPPY TEACHING

ON THE SIDEWALK BLEEDING By Hunter Digital Lesson Teacher Resource With Supplemental Activities HAPPY TEACHING

EVERYDAY USE by Alice Walker Digital Lesson Teacher Resource With Supplemental Activities HAPPY TEACHING

George Johnson

World Travel

The Nuclear Tourist

Visiting the site of the Chernobyl meltdown.

George Johnson National Geographic Oct 2014 10 min Permalink

Have an account?

The Nuclear Tourist

20 questions

Introducing new   Paper mode

No student devices needed.   Know more

What is the exclusion zone?

a vast, quarantined wilderness that surrounds Chernobyl

a military base camp

What are some characteristics that draw tourists to areas like Chernobyl?

the landscapes

outdoor activities

for the chilling results of a nuclear accident

What elements caused the explosion at Chernobyl in 1986?

an atomic bomb

a nuclear reactor overheated

a mixture of gases

What is the current condition of the towns of Pripyat and Chernobyl?

abandoned buildings, broken glass on the ground, and materials from the reactor's explosion

enormous industrial buildings

interesting amusement parks

Who is George Johnson?

Chernobyl's governor

a writer and journalist

Where is Chernobyl?

in the Soviet Union

Who are the "returness"?

stubborn old people, who insist on living in Chernobyl

tourists who want to come back

extreme tourists

How many villages were evacuated after the explosion?

Which is the approximate data about the people who were damaged with thyroid cancer for radiation exposure?

What other country suffered from a explosion in a nuclear plant?

Fukushima, Japan

Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan

Aushwitz, Germany

What is a type of literary nonfiction in which the writer describes what is like to visit a particular place?

Travel journalism

From the perspective of a reader, which are the results of an effective travel journalism article?

traveling tickets sales increasement

a vivid impression of a specific location or journey

personal tourist guides services

When does a writer give fact-based information in a travel journalism?

when he/she includes the place's location, how to get there, and key historical events

when he/she shares photographs in Instagram

when he/she shows the most popular hotels and resorts

When a writer includes what he/she saw, heard, felt, tasted, and smelled in a travel journal he/she is giving a __________.

personal observation

personal perspective

personal inferences

What are literary techniques in a travel journalism?

environmental issues

military issues

story-like sequence of events, figurative language, and dialogue

What is the main reason that so many buildings described in “The Nuclear Tourist,” such as the school and hospital, are crumbling and run-down?

No one has taken care of them for years.

Radiation in the area has damaged them.

Looters caused harm while removing valuable parts.

They were bulldozed soon after the nuclear accident.

The Latin root - spec means

The purpose of using scientific and technical terms in your writing is

There are three elements that are usually incorporated into travel journalism to effectively capture the readers interest and give a vivid impression of a specific location or journey. They are (check all that apply)

Fact-based information

Personal Observations

literary techniques

Explore all questions with a free account

Continue with email

Continue with phone

8 Places That Showcase Atomic Age Archaeology for Tourists

Eight places tell the story of the nuclear era.

By some reckonings, the Cold War began in 1945 at Trinity Site, New Mexico, with the explosion of the first atomic bomb, and ended 41 years later at Chernobyl, where the meltdown of a nuclear reactor became a precipitating event of the Soviet Union's downfall. (Read more in National Geographic magazine: "The Nuclear Tourist: An unforeseen legacy of the Chernobyl meltdown." )

Today some of the era's historic sites are open to visitors—a reminder of a time when two great powers were continuously on alert to wage nuclear war. Here are some of the key locations:

1. A Chain Reaction Starts in Chicago

On Ellis Avenue at the University of Chicago, a bronze Henry Moore sculpture marks the site of Chicago Pile 1 . It was here in 1942, the early days of the Manhattan Project, that Enrico Fermi and his team ignited the first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. The following year, the reactor's graphite blocks were dismantled and reassembled for more experiments at a site in the Palos Forest Preserve, southwest of Chicago. In the mid-1950s it was decommissioned, and the remains, along with those of another reactor, were buried and marked with a stone monument —the world's first nuclear ruins.

2. A Bomb Is Born in New Mexico

From Chicago, the research moved to the cool mountain air of Los Alamos, New Mexico, where the first atomic bomb was made. ( Manhattan , the new TV series, has it wrong: This is not a desert.) A walking tour takes you by Fuller Lodge, the majestic log structure that served as a dining and meeting hall for the project, which occupied the site of a former boys' school. The guest cabin next to the lodge now houses the Los Alamos Historical Museum, and nearby are the homes of Bathtub Row, the comparatively luxurious residences where Robert Oppenheimer, Hans Bethe, and other luminaries lived. The old laboratory sites are still hidden within the pine forests of the fenced restricted area. But the Atomic Heritage Foundation is lobbying Congress to incorporate them into a National Historical Park. It would also include other Manhattan Project facilities like those in Hanford, Washington, and Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Tourists at the Trinity Site in New Mexico, where the first atomic bomb was exploded in a test, examine a "Fat Man" bomb casing like the one that detonated over Nagasaki, Japan, on August 9, 1945, three days after the bombing of Hiroshima.

3. The Atomic Era Triggered at Trinity Site

FREE BONUS ISSUE

About 200 miles south of Los Alamos, in an area called Jornada del Muerto, or "journey of the dead," is Trinity Site. This really is a desert, and it was here on July 16, 1945, that the first atomic bomb—the Gadget—was exploded. Once a year, on the first Saturday in April, the site is open to tourists . The steel tower supporting the bomb was vaporized in the blast, and the crater was later filled and marked by an obelisk . The heat of the explosion fused sand and other debris into green glassy rocks called Trinitite. You're not allowed to take whatever pieces remain, though they often show up for sale on eBay.

4. Cities in Japan Recall Nuclear Devastation

The bombs had been meant for Hitler, but with the defeat of Germany the target became Japan. The two cities that were bombed, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have built parks and monuments, near ground zero, in remembrance of the horror. The most striking site at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park is the wreckage of the Industrial Promotion Hall, now called the A-Bomb Dome. At the Nagasaki Peace Park , a masonry wall stands as a reminder of the original Urakami Cathedral, where parishioners were worshipping when the bomb fell.

A nuclear bomb detonates underwater in a 1946 test at Bikini Atoll that was intended to investigate the impact of an explosion on warships.

5. Bikini Atoll Becomes a Test Site

You May Also Like

This pill could protect us from radiation after a nuclear meltdown

The true history of Einstein's role in developing the atomic bomb

Who is Oppenheimer? The controversial man behind the atomic bomb

Less than a year after Japan's surrender came the first nuclear tests at Bikini Atoll in the remote Marshall Islands—remote, except to the inhabitants, who were relocated to nearby islands as a fleet of surplus ships, some captured from Japan and Germany, arrived. For the next few years the vessels served as targets for atomic bombs. The last and largest, in 1954, was a 15-megaton thermonuclear device —far more powerful than the scientists had reckoned—that spread radioactive fallout some Marshall Islanders mistook for snow. In the late 1970s a mammoth attempt to clean up and resettle the atoll ended in failure. Today it is a destination for divers , who can explore the sunken wreckage and lament the Bikinians' fate.

6. Nevada Desert Becomes a Testing Ground

From 1951 until the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963, more than a hundred nuclear weapons were detonated in the desert air of the Nevada Test Site. Afterward underground blasts continued there for 30 more years. Today the Department of Energy schedules monthly tours , which depart from the Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas and visit sites including the Sedan Crater (1,280 feet in diameter and 320 feet deep), part of the Plowshare Program to see if nuclear explosions could be used for mining and for excavating canals, roadcuts, and quarries. Another stop is Survival Town, site of the remains of buildings erected and populated with mannequins—nuclear crash-test dummies—and then rocked with atomic blasts.

A display at the Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas highlights some of the kitsch that grew out of the nation's postwar fascination with atomic energy.

7. Missile Silos Stay on Alert in Arizona

Throughout the Cold War, intercontinental ballistic missiles sat in their silos as crew members waited around the clock for orders to launch an attack on the Soviet Union. The legendary Titan II was capable of delivering a nine-megaton warhead at a speed of 15,000 miles an hour to targets across the ocean. Today at the Titan Missile Museum near Tucson, visitors can descend into a decommissioned silo and even arrange to spend the night. "What was it like for Titan II crew members to sleep underground only a few feet away from the largest missile ever made by the United States? Now you can find out!"

8. Bunkers Await U.S. Leaders in Virginia, West Virginia

Had there been a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, the president of the United States and other officials might have waited out the fallout in a vast bunker inside Mount Weather , Virginia. Congress, meanwhile, would have relocated to another underground facility at Greenbrier resort in the mountains of West Virginia, where chambers had been excavated for the House and Senate. Mount Weather , still in operation, is closed to the public, but the Greenbrier resort offers tours of the former retreat . After emerging from the cavernous hideout, guests of the hotel can enjoy a game of golf and then head for the casino, perhaps to contemplate the deadly gamble that was the nuclear arms race.

Follow George Johnson on Twitter and the Web .

Related Topics

• NUCLEAR ENERGY
• NUCLEAR WEAPONS
• ARCHAEOLOGY

‘A ball of blinding light’: Atomic bomb survivors share their stories

Oppenheimer: The secrets he protected and the suspicions that followed him

How Chien-Shiung Wu changed the laws of physics

Just one pregnancy can add months to your biological age

U.S. nuclear testing's devastating legacy lingers, 30 years after moratorium

• Environment
• Perpetual Planet
• History & Culture
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

The Supreme Court Takes Up Homelessness

Can cities make it illegal to live on the streets.

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Katrin Bennhold. This is “The Daily.”

This morning, we’re taking a much closer look at homelessness in the United States as it reaches a level not seen in the modern era. California —

As the number of homeless people has surged in the US —

More than 653,000, a 12 percent population increase since last year.

The debate over homeless encampments across the country has intensified.

It is not humane to let people live on our streets in tents, use drugs. We are not standing for it anymore.

People have had it. They’re fed up. I’m fed up. People want to see these tents and encampments removed in a compassionate, thoughtful way. And we agree.

With public officials saying they need more tools to address the crisis.

We move from block to block. And every block they say, can’t be here, can’t be here, can’t be here. I don’t know where we’re supposed to go, you know?

And homeless people and their advocates saying those tools are intended to unfairly punish them.

They come and they sweep and they take everything from me, and I can’t get out of the hole I’m in because they keep putting me back in square one.

That debate is now reaching the Supreme Court, which is about to hear arguments in the most significant case on homelessness in decades, about whether cities can make it illegal to be homeless. My colleague Abbie VanSickle on the backstory of that case and its far-reaching implications for cities across the US.

[THEME MUSIC]

It’s Friday, April 19.

So Abbie, you’ve been reporting on this case that has been making waves, Grants Pass versus Johnson, which the Supreme Court is taking up next week. What’s this case about?

So this case is about a small town in Oregon where three homeless people sued the city after they received tickets for sleeping and camping outside. And this case is the latest case that shows this growing tension, especially in states in the West, between people who are homeless and cities who are trying to figure out what to do about this. These cities have seen a sharp increase in homeless encampments in public spaces, especially with people on sidewalks and in parks. And they’ve raised questions about public drug use and other safety issues in these spaces.

And so the question before the justices is really how far a city can go to police homelessness. Can city officials and police use local laws to ban people from laying down outside and sleeping in a public space? Can a city essentially make it illegal to be homeless?

So three homeless people sued the city of Grants Pass, saying it’s not illegal to be homeless, and therefore it’s not illegal to sleep in a public space.

Yes, that’s right. And they weren’t the first people to make this argument. The issue actually started years ago with a case about 500 miles to the East, in Boise, Idaho. And in that case, which is called Martin v. Boise, this man, Robert Martin, who is homeless in Boise, he was charged with a misdemeanor for sleeping in some bushes. And the city of Boise had laws on the books to prohibit public camping.

And Robert Martin and a group of other people who are homeless in the city, they sued the city. And they claimed that the city’s laws violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

And what makes it cruel and unusual?

So their argument was that the city did not have enough sufficient shelter beds for everyone who was homeless in the city. And so they were forced to sleep outside. They said, we have no place to go and that an essential human need is to sleep and we want to be able to lay down on the sidewalk or in an alley or someplace to rest and that their local laws were a violation of Robert Martin and the others’ constitutional rights, that the city is violating the Eighth Amendment by criminalizing the human need to sleep.

And the courts who heard the case agreed with that argument. The courts ruled that the city had violated the Constitution and that the city could not punish people for being involuntarily homeless. And what that meant, the court laid out, is that someone is involuntarily homeless if a city does not have enough adequate shelter beds for the number of people who are homeless in the city.

It does seem like a very important distinction. They’re saying, basically, if you have nowhere else to go, you can’t be punished for sleeping on the street.

Right. That’s what the court was saying in the Martin v. Boise case. And the city of Boise then appealed the case. They asked the Supreme Court to step in and take it on. But the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. So since then, the Martin v. Boise case controls all over the Western parts of the US in what’s called the Ninth Circuit, which includes Oregon where the Grants Pass case originated.

OK. So tell us about Grants Pass, this city at the center of the case and now in front of the Supreme Court. What’s the story there?

Grants Pass is a town in rural Southwestern Oregon. It’s a town of about 38,000 people. It’s a former timber town that now really relies a lot on tourists to go rafting through the river and go wine tasting in the countryside. And it’s a pretty conservative town.

When I did interviews, people talked about having a very strong libertarian streak. And when I talked with people in the town, people said when they were growing up there, it was very rare to see someone who was homeless. It just was not an issue that was talked a lot about in the community. But it did become a big issue about 10 years ago.

People in the community started to get worried about what they saw as an increase in the number of homeless people that they were noticing around town. And it’s unclear whether the problem was growing or whether local officials and residents were worried that it might, whether they were fearing that it might.

But in any case, in 2013, the city council decided to start stepping up enforcement of local ordinances that did things like outlaw camping in public parks or sleeping outside, this series of overlapping local laws that would make it impossible for people to sleep in public spaces in Grants Pass. And at one meeting, one of the former city council members, she said, “the point is to make it uncomfortable enough for them in our city so they will want to move on down the road.”

So it sounds like, at least in Grants Pass, that this is not really about reducing homelessness. It’s about reducing the number of visible homeless people in the town.

Well, I would say that city officials and many local residents would say that the homeless encampments are actually creating real concerns about public safety, that it’s actually creating all kinds of issues for everyone else who lives in Grants Pass. And there are drug issues and mental health issues, and that this is actually bringing a lot of chaos to the city.

OK. So in order to deal with these concerns, you said that they decided to start enforcing these local measures. What does that actually look like on the ground?

So police started handing out tickets in Grants Pass. These were civil tickets, where people would get fines. And if police noticed people doing this enough times, then they could issue them a trespass from a park. And then that would give — for a certain number of days, somebody would be banned from the park. And if police caught them in the park before that time period was up, then the person could face criminal time. They could go to jail.

And homeless people started racking up fines, hundreds of dollars of fines. I talked to a lot of people who were camping in the parks who had racked up these fines over the years. And each one would have multiple tickets they had no way to pay. I talked to people who tried to challenge the tickets, and they had to leave their belongings back in the park. And they would come back to find someone had taken their stuff or their things had been impounded.

So it just seemed to be this cycle that actually was entrenching people more into homelessness. And yet at the same time, none of these people had left Grants Pass.

So they did make it very uncomfortable for homeless people, but it doesn’t seem to be working. People are not leaving.

Right. People are not leaving. And these tickets and fines, it’s something that people have been dealing with for years in Grants Pass. But in 2018, the Martin v. Boise case happens. And not long after that, a group of people in Grants Pass challenged these ordinances, and they used the Boise case to make their argument that just like in Boise, Grants Pass was punishing people for being involuntarily homeless, that this overlapping group of local ordinances in Grants Pass had made it so there is nowhere to put a pillow and blanket on the ground and sleep without being in some kind of violation of a rule. And this group of local homeless people make the argument that everyone in Grants Pass who is homeless is involuntarily homeless.

And you told us earlier that it was basically the lack of available shelter that makes a homeless person involuntarily homeless. So is there a homeless shelter in Grants Pass?

Well, it sort of depends on the standard that you’re using. So there is no public low-barrier shelter that is easy for somebody to just walk in and stay for a night if they need someplace to go. Grants Pass does not have a shelter like that.

There is one shelter in Grants Pass, but it’s a religious shelter, and there are lots of restrictions. I spoke with the head of the shelter who explained the purpose is really to get people back into the workforce. And so they have a 30-day program that’s really designed for that purpose.

And as part of that, people can’t have pets. People are not allowed to smoke. They’re required to attend Christian religious services. And some of the people who I interviewed, who had chronic mental health and physical disabilities, said that they had been turned away or weren’t able to stay there because of the level of needs that they have. And so if you come in with any kind of issue like that, it can be a problem.

That’s a very long list of restrictions. And of course, people are homeless for a lot of very different reasons. It sounds like a lot of these reasons might actually disqualify them from this particular shelter. So when they say they have nowhere else to go, if they’re in Grants Pass, they kind of have a point.

So that’s what the court decided. In 2022, when the courts heard this case, they agreed with the homeless plaintiffs that there’s no low-barrier shelter in Grants Pass and that the religious shelter did not meet the court’s requirements. But the city, who are actually now represented by the same lawyers who argued for Boise, keeps appealing the case. And they appeal up to the Ninth Circuit just as in the Boise case, and the judges there find in favor of the homeless plaintiffs, and they find that Grants Pass’s ordinances are so restrictive that there is no place where someone can lay down and sleep in Grants Pass and that therefore the city has violated the Eighth Amendment and they cannot enforce these ordinances in the way that they have been for years.

So at that point, the court upholds the Boise precedent, and we’re where we were when it all started. But as we know, that’s not the end of the story. Because this case stays in the court system. What happened?

So by this point, the homelessness problem is really exploding throughout the Western part of the US with more visible encampments, and it really becomes a politically divisive issue. And leaders across the political spectrum point to Boise as a root cause of the problem. So when Grants Pass comes along, people saw that case as a way potentially to undo Boise if only they could get it before the Supreme Court.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

We’ll be right back.

Abbie, you just told us that as homeless numbers went up and these homeless encampments really started spreading, it’s no longer just conservatives who want the Supreme Court to revisit the Boise ruling. It’s liberals too.

That’s right. So there’s a really broad group of people who all started pushing for the Supreme Court to take up the Grants Pass case. And they did this by filing briefs to the Supreme Court, laying out their reasoning. And it’s everyone from the liberal governor of California and many progressive liberal cities to some of the most conservative legal groups. And they disagree about their reasoning, but they all are asking the court to clarify how to interpret the Boise decision.

They are saying, essentially, that the Boise decision has been understood in different ways in all different parts of the West and that that is causing confusion and creating all sorts of problems. And they’re blaming that on the Boise case.

It’s interesting, because after everything you told us about these very extreme measures, really, that the city of Grants Pass took against homeless people, it is surprising that these liberal bastions that you’re mentioning are siding with the town in this case.

Just to be clear, they are not saying that they support necessarily the way that Grants Pass or Boise had enforced their laws. But they are saying that the court rulings have tied their hands with this ambiguous decision on how to act.

And what exactly is so ambiguous about the Boise decision? Which if I remember correctly, simply said that if someone is involuntarily homeless, if they’re on the streets because there’s no adequate shelter space available, they can’t be punished for that.

Yeah. So there are a couple of things that are common threads in the cities and the groups that are asking for clarity from the court. And the first thing is that they’re saying, what is adequate shelter? That every homeless person situation is different, so what are cities or places required to provide for people who are homeless? What is the standard that they need to meet?

In order not to sleep on the street.

That’s right. So if the standard is that a city has to have enough beds for everyone who is homeless but certain kinds of shelters or beds wouldn’t qualify, then what are the rules around that? And the second thing is that they’re asking for clarity around what “involuntarily homeless” means. And so in the Boise decision, that meant that someone is involuntarily homeless if there is not enough bed space for them to go to.

But a lot of cities are saying, what about people who don’t want to go into a shelter even if there’s a shelter bed available? If they have a pet or if they are a smoker or if something might prohibit them from going to a shelter, how is the city supposed to weigh that and at what point would they cross a line for the court?

It’s almost a philosophical question. Like, if somebody doesn’t want to be in a shelter, are they still allowed to sleep in a public space?

Yeah. I mean, these are complicated questions that go beyond the Eighth Amendment argument but that a lot of the organizations that have reached out to the court through these friend of the court briefs are asking.

OK. I can see that the unifying element here is that in all these briefs various people from across the spectrum are saying, hello, Supreme Court. We basically need some clarity here. Give us some clarity.

The question that I have is why did the Supreme Court agree to weigh in on Grants Pass after declining to take up Boise?

Well, it’s not possible for us to say for certain because the Supreme Court does not give reasons why it has agreed to hear or to not hear a case. They get thousands of cases a year, and they take up just a few of those, and their deliberations are secret. But we can point to a few things.

One is that the makeup of the court has changed. The court has gained conservative justices in the last few years. This court has not been shy about taking up hot button issues across the spectrum of American society. In this case, the court hasn’t heard a major homelessness case like this.

But I would really point to the sheer number and the range of the people who are petitioning the court to take a look at this case. These are major players in the country who are asking the court for guidance, and the Supreme Court does weigh in on issues of national importance. And the people who are asking for help clearly believe that this is one of those issues.

So let’s start digging into the actual arguments. And maybe let’s start with the city of Grants Pass. What are the central arguments that they’re expected to make before the Supreme Court?

So the city’s arguments turn on this narrow legal issue of whether the Eighth Amendment applies or doesn’t. And they say that it doesn’t. But I actually think that in some ways, that’s not the most helpful way to understanding what Grants Pass is arguing.

What is really at the heart of their argument is that if the court upholds Grants Pass and Boise, that they are tying the hands of Grants Pass and hundreds of other towns and cities to actually act to solve and respond to homelessness. And by that, I mean to solve issues of people camping in the parks but also more broadly of public safety issues, of being able to address problems as they arise in a fluid and flexible way in the varied ways that they’re going to show up in all these different places.

And their argument is if the court accepts the Grants Pass and Boise holdings, that they will be constitutionalizing or freezing in place and limiting all of these governments from acting.

Right. This is essentially the argument being repeated again and again in those briefs that you mentioned earlier, that unless the Supreme Court overturns these decisions, it’s almost impossible for these cities to get the encampments under control.

Yes, that’s right. And they also argue they need to have flexibility in dealing actually with people who are homeless and being able to figure out using a local ordinance to try to convince someone to go to treatment, that they say they need carrots and sticks. They need to be able to use every tool that they can to be able to try to solve this problem.

And how do we make sense of that argument when Grants Pass is clearly not using that many tools to deal with homeless people? For example, it didn’t have shelters, as you mentioned.

So the city’s argument is that this just should not be an Eighth Amendment issue, that this is the wrong way to think about this case, that issues around homelessness and how a city handles it is a policy question. So things like shelter beds or the way that the city is handling their ordinances should really be left up to policymakers and city officials, not to this really broad constitutional argument. And so therefore, the city is likely to focus their argument entirely on this very narrow question.

And how does the other side counter this argument?

The homeless plaintiffs are going to argue that there’s nothing in the lower courts’ decisions that say that cities can’t enforce their laws that, they can’t stop people from littering, that they can’t stop drug use, that they can’t clear encampments if there becomes public safety problems. They’re just saying that a city cannot not provide shelter and then make it illegal for people to lay down and sleep.

So both sides are saying that a city should be able to take action when there’s public disorder as a result of these homeless encampments. But they’re pointing at each other and saying, the way you want to handle homelessness is wrong.

I think everyone in this case agrees that homelessness and the increase in homelessness is bad for everyone. It’s bad for people who are camping in the park. It is bad for the community, that nobody is saying that the current situation is tenable. Everyone is saying there need to be solutions. We need to be able to figure out what to do about homelessness and how to care for people who are homeless.

How do we wrestle with all these problems? It’s just that the way that they think about it couldn’t be further apart.

And what can you tell me about how the Supreme Court is actually expected to rule in this?

There are a number of ways that the justices could decide on this case. They could take a really narrow approach and just focus on Grants Pass and the arguments about those local ordinances. I think that’s somewhat unlikely because they’ve decided to take up this case of national importance.

A ruling in favor of the homeless plaintiffs would mean that they’ve accepted this Eighth Amendment argument, that you cannot criminalize being homeless. And a ruling for the city, every legal expert I’ve talked to has said that would mean an end to Boise and that it would break apart the current state that we’ve been living in for these last several years.

I’m struck by how much this case and our conversation has been about policing homelessness rather than actually addressing the root causes of homelessness. We’re not really talking about, say, the right to shelter or the right to treatment for people who are mentally ill and sleeping on the streets as a result, which is quite a big proportion. And at the end of the day, whatever way the ruling goes, it will be about the visibility of homelessness and not the root causes.

Yeah, I think that’s right. That’s really what’s looming in the background of this case is what impact is it going to have. Will it make things better or worse and for who? And these court cases have really become this talking point for cities and for their leaders, blaming the spike in encampments and the visibility of homelessness on these court decisions. But homelessness, everyone acknowledges, is such a complicated issue.

People have told me in interviews for the story, they’ve blamed increases in homelessness on everything from the pandemic to forest fires to skyrocketing housing costs in the West Coast, and that the role that Boise and now Grants Pass play in this has always been a little hard to pin down. And if the Supreme Court overturns those cases, then we’ll really see whether they were the obstacle that political leaders said that they were. And if these cases fall, it remains to be seen whether cities do try to find all these creative solutions with housing and services to try to help people who are homeless or whether they once again fall back on just sending people to jail.

Abbie, thank you very much.

Thank you so much.

Here’s what else you need to know today. Early on Friday, Israel attacked a military base in Central Iran. The explosion came less than a week after Iran’s attack on Israel last weekend and was part of a cycle of retaliation that has brought the shadow war between the two countries out in the open. The scale and method of Friday’s attack remained unclear, and the initial reaction in both Israel and Iran was to downplay its significance. World leaders have urged both sides to exercise restraint in order to avoid sparking a broader war in the region.

And 12 New Yorkers have been selected to decide Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan, clearing the way for opening statements to begin as early as Monday. Seven new jurors were added in short order on Thursday afternoon, hours after two others who had already been picked were abruptly excused.

Trump is accused of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment made to a porn star during his 2016 presidential campaign. If the jury convicts him, he faces up to four years in prison. Finally —

This is the New York Police Department.

The New York Police Department said it took at least 108 protesters into custody at Columbia University after University officials called the police to respond to a pro-Palestinian demonstration and dismantle a tent encampment.

We’re supporting Palestine. We’re supporting Palestine. 1, 2, 3, 4.

The crackdown prompted more students to vow that demonstrations would continue, expressing outrage at both the roundup of the student protesters and the plight of Palestinians in Gaza.

Free, free Palestine.

Today’s episode was produced by Olivia Natt, Stella Tan, and Eric Krupke with help from Rachelle Bonja. It was edited by Liz Baylen, fact checked by Susan Lee, contains original music by Will Reid Pat McCusker Dan Powell and Diane Wong and was engineered by Chris Wood. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Katrin Bennhold. See you on Monday.

• April 22, 2024   •   24:30 The Evolving Danger of the New Bird Flu
• April 19, 2024   •   30:42 The Supreme Court Takes Up Homelessness
• April 18, 2024   •   30:07 The Opening Days of Trump’s First Criminal Trial
• April 17, 2024   •   24:52 Are ‘Forever Chemicals’ a Forever Problem?
• April 16, 2024   •   29:29 A.I.’s Original Sin
• April 15, 2024   •   24:07 Iran’s Unprecedented Attack on Israel
• April 14, 2024   •   46:17 The Sunday Read: ‘What I Saw Working at The National Enquirer During Donald Trump’s Rise’
• April 12, 2024   •   34:23 How One Family Lost $900,000 in a Timeshare Scam
• April 11, 2024   •   28:39 The Staggering Success of Trump’s Trial Delay Tactics
• April 10, 2024   •   22:49 Trump’s Abortion Dilemma
• April 9, 2024   •   30:48 How Tesla Planted the Seeds for Its Own Potential Downfall
• April 8, 2024   •   30:28 The Eclipse Chaser

Hosted by Katrin Bennhold

Featuring Abbie VanSickle

Produced by Olivia Natt ,  Stella Tan ,  Eric Krupke and Rachelle Bonja

Edited by Liz O. Baylen

Original music by Will Reid ,  Pat McCusker ,  Dan Powell and Diane Wong

Engineered by Chris Wood

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music

Debates over homeless encampments in the United States have intensified as their number has surged. To tackle the problem, some cities have enforced bans on public camping.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments about whether such actions are legal, Abbie VanSickle, who covers the court for The Times, discusses the case and its far-reaching implications.

On today’s episode

Abbie VanSickle , a Supreme Court correspondent for The New York Times.

Background reading

A ruling in the case could help determine how states, particularly those in the West, grapple with a rising homelessness crisis .

In a rare alliance, Democrats and Republicans are seeking legal power to clear homeless camps .

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

Fact-checking by Susan Lee .

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Dan Farrell, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson and Nina Lassam.

Katrin Bennhold is the Berlin bureau chief. A former Nieman fellow at Harvard University, she previously reported from London and Paris, covering a range of topics from the rise of populism to gender. More about Katrin Bennhold

Abbie VanSickle covers the United States Supreme Court for The Times. She is a lawyer and has an extensive background in investigative reporting. More about Abbie VanSickle

Advertisement