Vagrancy laws
Vagrancy laws are regulations historically aimed at controlling the movement and behavior of individuals deemed "vagrants," typically understood as able-bodied but destitute people who do not engage in work. Originating from English common law, these laws were initially focused on preventing internal migration among rural laborers, especially before the Industrial Revolution, when economic shifts led to increased urban mobility. As the dynamics of labor changed, vagrancy laws evolved to address community concerns about potential crime and the financial implications of supporting those without means.
In the United States, these laws were often used to restrict the movement of "paupers" and "vagabonds," leading to severe penalties for those labeled as indolent drifters, particularly during economic downturns like the Great Depression. The enforcement of such laws has historically intersected with issues of racial and class discrimination, and they have been used to suppress labor unrest. Since the 1960s, particularly influenced by the Civil Rights movement, many vagrancy laws have been scrutinized and revised due to constitutional challenges, notably the landmark Supreme Court case Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville in 1972. This case highlighted the ambiguity of vagrancy laws, ultimately prompting a reevaluation of similar statutes across the country. Today, discussions surrounding vagrancy laws are often tied to broader debates about homelessness and social justice, reflecting ongoing challenges in addressing the needs of vulnerable populations.
On this Page
Vagrancy laws
Definition: Vagrancy, or the condition of being without “visible means of support,” is not a crime per se, but ordinances and statutes have often made it a punishable public offense
Significance: Dealing with the homeless vagrant has become a major urban problem that cannot be solved through the strict enforcement of outmoded vagrancy laws that are no longer practical or constitutionally appropriate.
Under English common law, a “vagrant” was construed as any able-bodied and destitute individual who refused work and attempted to live by begging. Before the Industrial Revolution most rural workers were agrarian laborers, and vagrants who roamed the land in search of better wages violated statutes against internal migration.
Economic factors forced changes in such laws. The enclosure movement ended much tenant farming, thereby ending the need to tie workers to the land. Next, the Industrial Revolution encouraged unemployed workers to seek factory jobs in mushrooming urban centers. The older vagrant and poor laws had restricted those who were unable to work to their home parishes and sent itinerant “loafers” and “idlers” to workhouses or forced them to return to their home communities. Under the new conditions, with worker migration inevitable, vagrancy laws shifted their focus to community worries about potential criminal behavior and the financial burden of caring for indigent drifters.
Eventually vagrancy came to be viewed as a form ofdisorderly conduct, and that association is reflected even in the earliest vagrancy laws in the United States. Under the Articles of Confederation, “paupers” and “vagabonds” were denied the right of free movement from one state to another, and both colonial and ensuing state vagrancy statutes had similar restrictions on the movement of indigent individuals. Under most vagrancy laws, indolent drifters could be jailed or required to move outside the legal jurisdiction of the enforcing agency.
In bad economic times, vagrancy laws could be stringently enforced. For example, during the Great Depression, some states used such laws to justify burning “Hoovervilles” (makeshift settlements of homeless people) and erecting blockades to prevent migrants from entering to look for work. Police have at times put the laws to other questionable uses—for example, in the service of controlling labor unrest or upholding community standards based on racial or class discrimination.
Beginning in the 1960’s, in part as a result of the Civil Rights movement, vagrancy laws increasingly came under judicial review. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, struck down a Florida vagrancy law because of its vagueness and condemnation of innocent behavior. Because the Florida law was very similar in scope and wording to laws in other states, the Court’s finding forced the revision of many state laws. Most were refashioned to comply with the Model Penal Code, which makes no mention of idleness, the original basis of vagrancy statutes in common law. Civil rights advocates have argued that the code itself contains constitutionally suspect provisions against loitering and prowling. Given the growing concerns over the nation’s high crime rate, however, it remains to be seen whether the civil rights of “potential criminals” will gain much additional protection.
Bibliography
Feldman, Leonard C. Citizens Without Shelter: Homelessness, Democracy, and Political Exclusion. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2004.
Levinson, David, ed. Encyclopedia of Homelessness. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 2004.
Smith, Christopher E. Courts and the Poor. Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1991.