Which US cities have ordinances that ban or restrict feeding homeless people in public?
Executive summary
Local reporting and advocacy groups say dozens of U.S. cities have ordinances that either ban or tightly restrict public feeding of people experiencing homelessness — reports cite at least 17 cities requiring permits and others totaling "dozens" or "more than 70" depending on methodology [1] [2] [3]. National organizations such as the National Coalition for the Homeless and the National Homelessness Law Center document many municipal rules framed as public‑health, public‑safety, or permitting measures [4] [5].
1. What the reporting actually documents: a patchwork of bans, permits, and restrictions
News outlets and advocacy groups describe a mix of approaches: some cities prohibit public feeding outright, others require permits with strict conditions, and still others restrict group size or locations (parks, sidewalks, transit stations). The New York Times reported Newark announced a ban (later framed as a permit requirement) for feeding in public spaces including parks and the train station [1]. Newsweek and Salon chronicled episodes where volunteers were cited or arrested under local rules (El Cajon, Tampa, Atlanta) and cite a period when 26 cities passed food‑sharing bans between 2013–2015 [4] [6].
2. Scope: "dozens" vs. "more than 70" vs. "at least 17" — why counts vary
Different sources count differently. The New York Times cited a 2019 National Homelessness Law Center report that found at least 17 cities ban or require permits; other advocacy sites and older compilations claim far higher totals (dozens or 70+) depending on whether they include panhandling laws, anti‑camping rules that indirectly limit aid, or municipal rules that limit giving in certain zones [1] [2] [3]. The National Coalition for the Homeless has publicly tracked many municipal actions and reported dozens of local restrictions in the 2010s [4] [5].
3. Examples cited repeatedly in reporting
Several municipalities appear frequently in coverage: El Cajon, CA (citations against volunteers during a hepatitis A outbreak); Tampa and Atlanta (arrests or tickets for feeding without permits); Newark, NJ (city email announcing a feeding prohibition later framed as permit‑required) [4] [1]. California locales such as Fremont have also passed ordinances tied to encampment enforcement that critics say can chill mutual‑aid activities [2] [7].
4. Official rationales: health, sanitation, safety, coordination
City officials commonly justify restrictions by citing public‑health risks (food safety, disease outbreaks), sanitation and clean‑up costs, public safety, and the need to coordinate charitable services to avoid concentrating encampments [4] [6]. The New York Times notes some municipal rules tie feeding to broader shelter/housing planning and permit regimes [1].
5. Advocacy counterarguments and legal challenges
Homeless‑service advocates and civil liberties groups argue these rules criminalize poverty and compassion; they say public feeding can be protected as religious expression and that health/sanitation concerns can be addressed without bans [4] [2]. The National Homelessness Law Center and other organizations have pursued litigation and policy campaigns to block punitive local measures and to document their spread [2] [8].
6. How enforcement and practice vary on the ground
Coverage shows enforcement is inconsistent: some cities issue tickets or misdemeanor charges (El Cajon, Tampa), while others revise language after scrutiny (Newark moved from a stated ban toward a permit requirement after inquiries) [4] [1]. A city may restrict only large group feedings, limit locations (near tourist or transit hubs), or require food‑safety compliance or site supervision rather than impose an outright prohibition [1] [7].
7. Why precise answers require local research
No single national list with a uniformly applied definition appears in the provided reporting; counts and city names depend on whether one counts anti‑panhandling laws, anti‑camping statutes that affect aid, permit regimes, or targeted public‑feeding bans [1] [3] [5]. For a definitive, current list you must check the municipal code or recent local reporting for each city of interest — available sources do not supply a single up‑to‑date, authoritative national roster.
8. What to watch for when evaluating claims
When you see assertions like "more than 70 cities" or "dozens": check the source’s definition and date — many tallies come from advocacy reports in the 2010s and may include broadly related ordinances (panhandling, camping, group size limits) rather than explicit, current bans on food distribution [3] [5]. Also note political framing: municipal officials emphasize health/safety and coordination, while advocates frame the same laws as criminalization of aid [4] [6].
If you want, I can compile a targeted list of named cities mentioned in these reports (El Cajon, Tampa, Atlanta, Newark, Fremont, Miami/Miami‑Dade examples, Seattle, Houston, etc.) with the exact citation lines and suggest local code language to inspect next.