The state’s emergency shelter system cannot require families to provide third-party verification of certain information – such as proof of their family ties or whether at least one of them resides in Massachusetts – before immediately placing them in a shelter, decided the Supreme Judicial Court. THURSDAY.

The 16-page ruling stemmed from a class-action lawsuit in 2016, when families and civil rights organizations sued the Department of Housing and Community Development, now the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities ( HLC), for denying shelter to some families who could not immediately provide documentation as a prerequisite for admission to an emergency shelter.

Massachusetts’ Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter system is specifically intended to serve families, and HLC has in the past turned away groups who could not present birth certificates or other legal documents proving that they ‘they were related.6

In every annual budget since 2005, Parliament has included a provision that HLC “shall immediately provide accommodation for up to 30 days to families who appear to be eligible for accommodation based on statements provided by the family and any other information in question.” possession of the executive. desk.”

It was the interpretation of this language that is rewritten into state law every year that led the court to make its decision.

“The plain language of the immediate placement provision provides that a family shall be provided with immediate temporary placement when it appears that they meet the criteria for eligibility for housing, and that the appearance of eligibility may be established at the time of the initial request by declarations from the family. members and by the information already in the agency’s possession. Third-party verification of eligibility criteria is not required at the time of initial application,” states the decision written by Supreme Judicial Court Associate Justice Gabrielle Wolohojian.

Kelly Turley of the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, which filed an amicus brief in the case, said the 30 days families have after being immediately placed in a shelter often gives them time to reunite or recover lost documents, or find other ways to prove their relationship and residence.

“In some cases, families are actively fleeing domestic violence, or they’ve suffered a fire, or they’ve been doubled over and their belongings have been lost in the mix or someone has stolen them, so key documents that are requested to demonstrate continued eligibility may not be available. be ready at the time of application,” Turley said.

She later added: “The Legislature’s intent is to ensure that families eligible for shelter can access shelter in a timely manner…We think it’s really significant that the SJC has made it clear to the administration that families who appear eligible should be placed immediately. »

Although Turley celebrated the decision, she said it was less effective today than it would have been in 2016, when Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration oversaw state agencies, to put families to safety more quickly.

Since the trial began, the landscape around EA shelters has changed significantly. Following a surge in demand that began in late fall 2022, the Healey administration implemented a number of strict restrictions on shelter access for the 7,500 families finding temporary housing in state-run establishments.

Over the past year and a half, in an attempt to control rising costs, Gov. Maura Healey instituted a cap of 7,500 families. Other people seeking shelter are placed on a waiting list, now called a “contact list.” The governor also instituted a nine-month limit on how long families can stay, as well as a controversial policy that allows families to stay in overflow shelters for up to five days but then prevents them from seeking shelter. more traditional shelter for six months.

Turley said that since most families are put on the waiting list when they apply for shelter instead of being immediately housed in temporary housing, the SJC’s decision likely won’t have as much of an effect.

“Even if a family is presumed approved for full EA placement, they may wait days, weeks, or months before actually being placed. So in those cases, the 30 day period – they may be out of the shelter for that period anyway, because there is no placement available for them,” Turley said.

She and other providers have argued against the restrictions placed on the EA, and Turley said Thursday that she hoped they would be lifted in the future, and that the SJC’s decision would then have a greater impact on the protection of families fleeing dangerous situations so they can find a safe place to stay immediately.

Asked to comment on the decision, an HLC spokesperson said: “We are reviewing the SJC’s decision and the operational impact it may have on the emergency assistance program. »