9th Circuit Court rejects Vallejo’s request to rule on homeless encampment removals

by John Glidden | glid24@protonmail.com | October 30, 2025

VALLEJO – The city of Vallejo was dealt a legal blow earlier this month when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request that it rule on the city’s appeal of a February decision from a federal judge granting a preliminary injunction to an unsheltered woman.

The appeals court called Vallejo’s appeal “moot,” after Evelyn Alfred, who is also known as “Brown Sugar,” found housing, while her small structure located on a vacant lot along Mare Island War near Tennessee Street was destroyed by fire.

Vallejo still sought a decision from the appeals court, despite Alfred also filing paperwork to dismiss her case, arguing that such lawsuits harm the city’s ability to remove “disruptive encampments from public spaces during inclement weather.”

“It is vitally important that this Court address the underlying state-created danger issue, as this issue will continue to arise in relation to the removal of homeless encampments. In the past year alone, Vallejo has been sued three times in the Eastern District of California relating to homeless encampment removals; each suit alleged violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s state-created danger doctrine, wrote Assistance City Attorney Hampton Jackson in the September 25 brief to the appeals court.

“The City of Vallejo, as well as every other city in this circuit, continues to perform a critical government function by addressing the public health and safety concerns associated with homeless encampments on public property. Absent a ruling from this Court, Vallejo and other government agencies will continue to be hindered from ensuring that public property remains accessible to all of its citizens.” Jackson added.

The court wasn’t moved by the city’s argument.

“The city’s contention that it will continue to clear encampments and face suit from other plaintiffs does not change our conclusion,” the court wrote. “Alfred challenged the constitutionality of the application of a city policy to her situation, not the policy itself.”

Alfred initially won a temporary restraining order against the city in late 2024 when U.S. District Court Judge Dena Coggins ordered Vallejo not to evict the woman after officials allegedly failed to provide her with housing and support services. Months later, in February 2025, Coggins ruled in favor of Alfred issuing the preliminary injunction to prevent the city from evicting her from the area.

Jackson further wrote that because Alfred’s current housing situation is uncertain, “there is a strong likelihood that she will once again become unhoused in Vallejo and return to prior encampment.”

Attorney Anthony Prince with the Vallejo Homeless Union told the federal district court in early September that “Ms. Alfred is now housed in a federally supported apartment in the City of Vallejo,” as reported by the Vallejo Sun. However, with policy changes by the U.S. Department. of Housing and Urban Development could harm Alfred’s ability to stay housed.

The appeals court rejected the city’s argument about Alfred’s future housing needs, calling it “speculative.”

“Given the circumstances of Alfred’s present housing, the destruction of the encampment at 710 Mare Island, and the nature of the City’s past dealings with Alfred regarding her relocation, a recurrence of the facts leading to the district court’s preliminary injunction is speculative on this record,” the court wrote in its October 15 decision.

City officials also revealed in court filings that it conducts weekly encampment removals and expects the practice to continue.

“Currently, Vallejo conducts weekly homeless encampment removals and intends to continue these removals in the coming months,” Jackson wrote. In earlier October, the city cleared a controversial homeless encampment, which included RVs, from along a section of Pennsylvania Street in downtown Vallejo.