Wu orders pause in Mass-and-Cass de-tenting

But a while ago, one of your esteemed commenters suggested a rebranding of the Mass & Cass area to "Sacklerville" in honor of a family that (a) loves having things named after them and (b) did so much to make that neighborhood what it is today. I really want it to catch on.

Mass & Cass is a bike chop shop at this point. They really need to do something about the theft enabled by its existence. Even if that doesn't mean tearing down tents cops should be putting 2 and 2 together when they see a tent freakin surrounded by bikes.

based on reporting by Adam and in the Globe (see https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/11/17/metro/aclu-...), the ACLU position is that the city isn't offering appropriate alternate shelter to the tent dwellers, even if emergency shelter (i.e. homeless shelters) is being offered because the shelters do not offer the appropriate and adequate services these people, many of whom are suffering from drug addictions and likely other chronic medical issues, need.

Am I understanding this correctly: they should be allowed to sleep in tents on cold sidewalks, without any of the needed services on-site, and no adequate sanitation, rather than be forced to move into a shelter that lacks the services but is safe from the elements, provides proper sanitation facilities and presumably up to 3 meals a day?

Basically, if you can't meet their every need (which our public health approach here SHOULD be doing, I'm not against that) then you must allow them to live in a worse situation than the one you are currently offering. Am I getting this right?

I'm not a lawyer nor involved with the operations of the ACLU, but I can't see myself being able to make this argument in good faith if I were in their position right now.

I support WU, but unless the judge orders a pause it should proceed. The city is doing the best they can to provide housing and treatment for these people. Leaving them there is just a set up for deaths by exposure.

... whether the city is pausing until the entire lawsuit is resolved (which may take a while) or until the ACLU's request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) or preliminary injunction is resolved — those should be resolved within days. The TRO was denied this afternoon.

By way of explanation: roughly speaking, a TRO is what you ask for if you think the grounds for relief are so obvious and the need for relief is so urgent that the court shouldn't even wait for the other side to respond before ordering relief. A preliminary injunction is relief that the court may grant after it has heard from both sides but before a full trial. I am guessing that once the city learned about the lawsuit, it offered to pause the relocations at least until a preliminary injunction hearing could be held, perhaps as a way of persuading the court that a TRO was not warranted.

These people aren’t rats in the Public Garden.
You can’t erase them by erasing their few possessions and scattering them to other parts of the city. You can’t just tow them to some lot because they are parked illegally.