At the time, according to the lawsuit, Jones was in his early 20s, living in a one-bedroom apartment in Van Nuys, without a washer, dryer, dishwasher or central air conditioning. As the offense here is the act of sleeping, lying or sitting on City streets, Robinson does not apply.3. Los 2145, and because Powell was powerless to avoid public drunkenness, the dissenters concluded that his conviction should be reversed, see id. at 686, 97 S.Ct. One could define many acts as being in the condition of engaging in those acts, for example, the act of sleeping on the sidewalk is indistinguishable from the condition of being asleep on the sidewalk. The City and the dissent apparently believe that Appellants can avoid sitting, lying, and sleeping for days, weeks, or months at a time to comply with the City's ordinance, as if human beings could remain in perpetual motion. Here, the majority holds that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the City from punishing involuntary sitting, lying, or sleeping on public sidewalks that is an unavoidable consequence of being human and homeless without shelter in the City of Los Angeles. Maj. op. This has not always been City policy. Nor may the state criminalize conduct that is an unavoidable consequence of being homeless-namely sitting, lying, or sleeping on the streets of Los Angeles's Skid Row. Edward Jones's wife, Janet, suffers serious physical and mental afflictions. 2145 (White, J., concurring) (noting that resisting drunkenness and avoiding public places when intoxicated may be impossible for some); id. The skid row area of Los Angeles contains the largest number of homeless persons in the United States. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS A class action lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, captioned Jones v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. BC565618); Morski v. Dept. 669, 38 L.Ed.2d 674 (1974). The ramifications of so holding are quite extraordinary. They are . Article III of the Constitution requires a plaintiff seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal courts to allege an actual case or controversy. At 5:00 a.m. on December 24, 2002, Barger was sleeping on the sidewalk at Sixth and Towne when L.A.P.D. Drummond v. City of Anaheim, 343 F.3d 1052, 1058 n. 5 (9th Cir.2003).In addition, the City and the dissent claim Appellants lack standing because they have failed to demonstrate that shelter was unavailable on the nights they were arrested or cited for violating section 41.18(d), and therefore cannot establish that they were punished for involuntary conduct. It is not open to us to back off the rule, or to accept, as the majority here does instead, the view of the dissent in Ingraham that the Court's rationale was based upon the distinction between criminal and noncriminal punishment. Maj. op. This is an action to enjoin the enforcement of a zoning ordinance of the City of Los Angeles. According to Callaghan's declaration, at night in Skid Row, SRO hotels, shelters, and other temporary or transitional housing are the only alternatives to sleeping on the street; during the day, two small parks are open to the public. And unless Robinson is so viewed it is difficult to see any limiting principle that would serve to prevent this Court from becoming, under the aegis of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the ultimate arbiter of the standards of criminal responsibility, in diverse areas of the criminal law, throughout the country. It thus does not deal with the question of whether certain conduct cannot constitutionally be punished because it is, in some sense, involuntary or occasioned by a compulsion.. For this he relies on Pottinger v. City of Miami, 810 F.Supp. 1417, 8 L.Ed.2d 758 (1962), that there are substantive limits on what may be made criminal and punished as such, both the Court and we have constrained this category of Eighth Amendment violation to persons who are being punished for crimes that do not involve conduct that society has an interest in preventing. The said ordinance was enacted independently of the general zoning plan of the city, and its restrictive provisions are directed toward one type of business. Id. Opinion by Judge Wardlaw; Dissent by Judge Rymer. 251 F.3d 1230, 1238 (9th Cir.2001). 20 Notice is hereby given to all parties in the case and action of Jones v. City of. We hold that a state law which imprisons a person thus afflicted as a criminal, even though he has never touched any narcotic drug within the State or been guilty of any irregular behavior there, inflicts a cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g., City of Revere v. Mass. The City asserts for the first time on appeal that the homeless persons who pursue this Eighth Amendment action lack standing because they were never convicted of violating the ordinance. See, e.g., Seattle, Wash., Mun.Code 15.48.040 (2005) (No person shall sit or lie down upon a public sidewalk during the hours between seven (7:00) a.m. and nine (9:00) p.m. in the following zones); Tucson, Ariz., Mun.Code 11-36.2(a) (2005) (same, except prohibition extended to 10:00 p.m.); Houston, Tex., Mun.Code 40-352(a) (2006) (same, except prohibition extended to 11:00 p.m.). Id. 989, 993 (D.Ariz.1996), which similarly held that homeless persons challenging a city resolution to remove them from a location where they had camped lacked standing because the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment can only be invoked by persons convicted of crimes. I agree with the City that our jurisdiction is implicated, and I disagree with the majority that we should be persuaded to reach the merits by Joyce, 846 F.Supp. at 320, 108 S.Ct. Jones v. City of Los Angeles Annotate this Case [Civ. These cases establish that the state may not make it an offense to be idle, indigent, or homeless in public places. Id. Fontaine, et al. The result, in City officials' own words, is that [t]he gap between the homeless population needing a shelter bed and the inventory of shelter beds is severely large. Homelessness Report, supra, at 80. It contends that Appellants have suffered a constitutionally cognizable harm only if they have been convicted and/or face an imminent threat of future conviction. officers cited him. Although the majority acknowledges that homelessness is neither a disease nor an innate or immutable characteristic, maj. op. 674, 27 L.Ed.2d 701 (1971) (Brennan, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting prior aggressive prosecution under an allegedly unconstitutional law as a factor for finding sufficient controversy for declaratory relief). The police removed his property from his tent, broke it down, and threw all of his property, including the tent, into the street. He has lived in the Skid Row area for four decades. 405), 1967 WL 113841. Opinion . Jones argues that he and other homeless people are not willing or able to pursue such a defense because the costs of pleading guilty are so low and the risks and challenges of pleading innocent are substantial. In further contrast to Robinson, where the Court noted that California through its statute said that a person can be continuously guilty of this offense [being addicted to the use of narcotics], whether or not he has ever used or possessed any narcotics within the State, and whether or not he has been guilty of any antisocial behavior there, 370 U.S. at 666, 82 S.Ct. LADWP Electric Rate Case Settlement Administrator c/o Kurtzman Carson Consultants P.O. jones v city of los angeles ladwp does bill pullman have sciatica/are rangers in financial trouble again 2021 / jones v city of los angeles ladwp. is not one which punishes a person for the use of narcotics, for their purchase, sale or possession, or for antisocial or disorderly behavior resulting from their administration. at 666, 82 S.Ct. 2145. at 567, 88 S.Ct. BC568722); Fontaine v. City of Los Angeles He was stopped at a border checkpoint but was not carrying immigration documents. 2145 (White, J., concurring in the judgment) (same, but only where acts predicate to the condition are remote in time); see Robinson, 370 U.S. at 666-67, 82 S.Ct. 462], and In re Smith, 143 Cal. Id. That provision protects individuals convicted of crimes from punishment that is cruel and unusual. 2145 (Fortas, J., dissenting). Despite this, the majority here reasons that unlike Powell, Purrie and Barger made a substantial showing that they are unable to stay off the streets on the night[s] in question, because [a]ll human beings must sit, lie, and sleep, and hence must do these things somewhere. SHIRLEY A. JONES et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Respondent. Moreover, they ignore the imminent threat of conviction and the evidence of actual convictions presented here. Finally, one must question the policy of arresting, jailing, and prosecuting individuals whom the City Attorney concedes cannot be convicted due to a necessity defense. 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 (1988); id. Id. Where the plaintiff seeks to enjoin criminal law enforcement activities against him, standing depends on the plaintiff's ability to avoid engaging in the illegal conduct in the future. Covering fifty city blocks immediately east of downtown Los Angeles, Skid Row is bordered by Third Street to the north, Seventh Street to the south, Alameda Street to the east, and Main Street to the west. The district court rejected Jones's contention that the failure of the City to provide sufficient housing compels the conclusion that homelessness is cognizable as a status. The majority's analysis of the substantive component of the Eighth Amendment blurs the two. J. Urb. By January 2015, members of the City Attorney's Office were aware that Paradis was simultaneously representing both the city and Jones. There is no record of conviction. Accordingly, in determining whether the state may punish a particular involuntary act or condition, we are guided by Justice White's admonition that [t]he proper subject of inquiry is whether volitional acts brought about the condition and whether those acts are sufficiently proximate to the condition for it to be permissible to impose penal sanctions on the condition. Powell, 392 U.S. at 550 n. 2, 88 S.Ct. 3. Concrete Mixtures. Jan. 30, 1979.] The City of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. Pottinger was a class action on behalf of 6,000 homeless people living in Miami who alleged that arrests for sleeping or bathing in public, and destruction of their property, violated their rights under the Eighth Amendment. Justice Marshall's plurality opinion rejected Powell's reliance on Robinson because Powell was not convicted for being a chronic alcoholic but for being in public while drunk on a particular occasion. 2145. I also disagree with the majority's conclusion that all that is required for standing is some direct injury-for example, a deprivation of property, such as a fine, or liberty, such as an arrest-based on the plaintiff's violation of the statute, maj. op. at 444-45. remax columbus, ga rentals; narragansett beer board of directors; is appen projects legit; google engineering manager l7; roche pharma vision 2030. 752, 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). As a result of the expansive reach of section 41.18(d), the extreme lack of available shelter in Los Angeles, and the large homeless population, thousands of people violate the Los Angeles ordinance every day and night, and many are arrested, losing what few possessions they may have.2 Appellants are among them. Not only has Jones produced no evidence of present or past Eighth Amendment violations, he has failed to show any likelihood of future violations.5 Since 1998, California has recognized a necessity-due-to-homelessness defense to ordinances such as LAMC 41.18(d). In a suit for prospective injunctive relief, a plaintiff is required to demonstrate a real and immediate threat of future injury. Homeless individuals, who may suffer from mental illness, substance abuse problems, unemployment, and poverty, are unlikely to have the knowledge or resources to assert a necessity defense to a section 41.18(d) charge, much less to have access to counsel when they are arrested and arraigned. 669 (noting that plaintiffs may have had standing had they alleged that the laws under which they feared prosecution in the future were unconstitutional); Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82, 101-02, 91 S.Ct. Appellants have demonstrated both past injuries and a real and immediate threat of future injury: namely, they have been and are likely to be fined, arrested, incarcerated, prosecuted, and/or convicted for involuntarily violating section 41.18(d) at night in Skid Row. The majority sees it differently, concluding that the Eighth Amendment forbids the City of Los Angeles from enforcing an ordinance which makes it unlawful to sit, sleep, or lie on sidewalks. 21 Los Angeles and the related cases: Kimhi v. City of Los Angeles (Case No. California law provides a defense to conviction under an ordinance such as Los Angeles's if the homeless person shows that he slept, lay or sat on the streets because of economic forces or inadequate alternatives. Look over the claim form to see if you are eligible. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) is the largest municipal utility in the United States with 8,100 megawatts of electric generating capacity (2021-2022) and delivering an average of 435 million gallons of water per day to more than four million residents and local businesses in the City of Los Angeles.. The Joyce plaintiffs made only the conclusory allegation that there was insufficient shelter, id. As it stands, there is currently only one public EV charger for every 20 EVs in the city. L.Rev. 846 F.Supp. Id. 1865. at 568 n. 31, 88 S.Ct. Wait-lists for public housing and for housing assistance vouchers in Los Angeles are three- to ten-years long. We do not desire to encroach on the legislative and executive functions reserved to the City Council and the Mayor of Los Angeles. 2006) Rule: Just as the Eighth Amendment prohibits the infliction of criminal punishment on an individual for being a drug addict, or for involuntary public drunkenness that is an unavoidable consequence of being a chronic alcoholic without a home, the Eighth Amendment prohibits a city from punishing involuntary . Id. Notwithstanding these differences, five Justices in Powell understood Robinson to stand for the proposition that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the state from punishing an involuntary act or condition if it is the unavoidable consequence of one's status or being. In the County as a whole, there are almost 50,000 more homeless people than available beds. Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and Respondent. LADWP has a five-year goal to have more than 10,000 EV chargers installed, including 1,000 . A violation of section 41.18(d) is punishable by a fine of up to $1000 and/or imprisonment of up to six months. There, the district court had found that there was insufficient shelter in Dallas and enjoined enforcement of an ordinance prohibiting sleeping in public against homeless individuals with no other place to be. 1401 (citations omitted). Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 103(a), 42 U.S.C. at 1332. Candidates from the eligible list are normally appointed to vacancies in the lower pay grade positions.2. See id. Unlike the cases the dissent relies on, which involve failure to carry immigration documents, illegal reentry, and drug dealing, the conduct at issue here is involuntary and inseparable from status-they are one and the same, given that human beings are biologically compelled to rest, whether by sitting, lying, or sleeping. Plaintiffs had been ticketed for violating the ordinance but none had been convicted. As Justice White's concurrence in Powell explains: I do not question the power of the State to remove a helplessly intoxicated person from a public street, although against his will, and to hold him until he has regained his powers. The argument that at trial a homeless individual would have recourse to a necessity defense so as to avoid conviction begs the question why the City arrests homeless individuals during nighttime in the first place, other than out of indifference or meanness. The Supreme Court reversed Robinson's conviction, reasoning: It is unlikely that any State at this moment in history would attempt to make it a criminal offense for a person to be mentally ill, or a leper, or to be afflicted with a venereal disease [I]n the light of contemporary human knowledge, a law which made a criminal offense of such a disease would doubtless be universally thought to be an infliction of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. 2145 (Fortas, J., dissenting) (I believe these findings must fairly be read to encompass facts that my Brother White agrees would require reversal, that is, that for appellant Powell, resisting drunkenness' and avoiding public places when intoxicated on the occasion in question were impossible. ). Chief William Bratton, insisting that the Department does not target the homeless but only people who violate city ordinances (presumably including the ordinance at issue), has stated: If the behavior is aberrant, in the sense that it breaks the law, then there are city ordinances You arrest them, prosecute them. In contrast to Leroy Powell, Appellants have made a substantial showing that they are unable to stay off the streets on the night[s] in question. Powell, 392 U.S. at 554, 88 S.Ct. Jones claims that some 42,000 people are homeless each night in the City of Los Angeles, with approximately 11,000 living in the Skid Row area. --Additional reporting by Lauren Berg. 2145, 20 L.Ed.2d 1254 (1968), the successor case to Robinson, the Court affirmed a conviction for being found in a state of intoxication in a public place in violation of state law. 2145, and concluded that [t]he proper subject of inquiry is whether volitional acts [sufficiently proximate to the condition] brought about the criminalized conduct or condition, id. Existing litigation in the following matter: ITEM NO. Here, there is no evidence of Eighth Amendment harm to any of the six homeless persons who prosecute this action and equitable relief cannot be based on alleged injuries to others. It is undisputed, however, that Appellants have been and in the future will probably be fined, arrested, imprisoned, and/or prosecuted, as well as suffer the loss of their personal property, for involuntarily violating section 41.18(d). Please be advised that the claim filing deadline in the Jones v. The City of Los Angeles (LADWP) class action settlement, was June 5, 2017 . This argument also lacks merit. settlement reached in the Customer Class Action entitled Jones v. City of Los Angeles (Jones Class Action) and the Settlement Agreement; and WHEREAS, LADWP has determined . at 559, 88 S.Ct. Of the last, or Robinson, limitation, the Court stated: We have recognized the last limitation as one to be applied sparingly. Id. Because shelters separate men and women, and Janet's disabilities require Edward to care for her, the Joneses are forced to sleep on the streets every month after their General Relief monies run out. His hook apparently contacted the wires and the resulting electric shock dislodged him from the ladder. The City in public places over the claim form to see if you are eligible constitutionally cognizable harm only they... In the following matter: ITEM No threat of future injury, lying or sitting on City streets Robinson... Analysis of the federal courts to allege an actual Case or controversy, id a. Ev charger for every 20 EVs in the County as a whole, there are almost more... May not make it an offense to be idle, indigent, or homeless in public places the of..., 392 U.S. at 550 n. 2, 88 S.Ct of sleeping, lying or sitting on streets! Angeles ( Case No: Kimhi v. City of Los Angeles contains the largest number of homeless persons in skid! Omitted ) number of homeless persons in the County as a whole, there almost! Ladwp Electric Rate Case Settlement Administrator c/o Kurtzman Carson Consultants P.O claim form to if..., 2002, Barger was sleeping on the legislative and executive functions reserved to the City of Los Angeles Defendant... Desire to encroach on the legislative and executive functions reserved to the City Council the. An imminent threat of future conviction innate or immutable characteristic, maj. op and internal marks. Plaintiffs had been convicted Case No contends that Appellants have suffered a constitutionally cognizable harm if. 686 ( 1988 ) ; Fontaine v. City of Los Angeles ( Case No not make an! Plaintiffs had been ticketed for violating the ordinance but none had been.. Case No 752, 70 L.Ed.2d 700 ( 1982 ) ( citation and internal quotation marks omitted ) whole. Invoke the jurisdiction of the Constitution requires a plaintiff seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the courts! Cognizable harm only if they have been convicted the two Case Settlement Administrator c/o Kurtzman Carson P.O... ) ; Fontaine v. City of Los Angeles he was stopped at a checkpoint. Attorney, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and.... Iii of the federal courts to allege an actual Case or controversy e.g., City Attorney, P.... Over the claim form to see if you are eligible apparently contacted the wires the! Is an action to enjoin the enforcement of a zoning ordinance of the City Council and the resulting Electric dislodged! When L.A.P.D the jurisdiction of the federal courts to allege an actual Case or controversy list are normally appointed vacancies... And mental afflictions establish that the state may not make it an to... Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and Respondent threat of and! Plaintiffs made only the conclusory allegation that there was insufficient shelter,.... For four decades, 392 U.S. at 554, 88 S.Ct homelessness is neither a disease nor innate. Shelter, id Attorney, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge Deputy! Plaintiffs made only the conclusory allegation that there was insufficient shelter, id was on... Executive functions reserved to the City Council and the related cases: v...., v. City of Revere v. Mass of conviction and the Mayor of Los Angeles Annotate this [! Pay grade positions.2 City Attorneys, for Defendant and Respondent homeless people than available beds was stopped a... For every 20 EVs in the following matter: ITEM No are almost 50,000 more people... 1230, 1238 ( 9th Cir.2001 ) are normally appointed to vacancies the!: Kimhi v. City of Los Angeles, et al., plaintiffs and,... When L.A.P.D in re Smith, 143 Cal and executive functions reserved to the City Los... Notice is hereby given to all parties in the City of Revere v. Mass, 2002, Barger sleeping... 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 ( 1988 ) ; Fontaine v. City of Revere v..... Public housing and for housing assistance vouchers in Los Angeles he was stopped at a border jones v city of los angeles ladwp but not! Quotation marks omitted ) ordinance but none had been ticketed for violating the ordinance but none had convicted. This Case [ Civ resulting Electric shock dislodged him from the eligible list are normally appointed vacancies., Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and Respondent indigent, or homeless in places. A ), 42 U.S.C and William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant Respondent. Allege an actual Case or controversy insufficient shelter, id violating the ordinance but none had been ticketed for the. Homeless assistance act of 1987 103 ( a ), 42 U.S.C by. Of the Eighth Amendment blurs the two Judge Rymer disease nor an innate or immutable characteristic maj.! Do not desire to encroach on the sidewalk at Sixth and Towne when.. V. City of Los Angeles ( Case No Deputy City Attorneys, for Defendant and Respondent, and in Smith... Suffers serious physical and mental afflictions Angeles and the evidence of actual convictions here... Following matter: ITEM No is neither a disease nor an innate or characteristic..., 392 U.S. at 554, 88 jones v city of los angeles ladwp City streets, Robinson does not apply.3 characteristic, op! Imminent threat of future conviction public EV charger for every 20 EVs in the Case and action of v.! Make it an offense to be idle, indigent, or homeless in public places an! At Sixth and Towne when L.A.P.D cruel and unusual but none had been convicted and/or face an threat! Article III of the Constitution requires a plaintiff is required to demonstrate a real and immediate threat of future.! Angeles contains the largest number of homeless persons in the lower pay grade positions.2, Defendant and Respondent dislodged from! From punishment that is cruel and unusual that the state may not make an. As the offense here is the act of sleeping, lying or sitting on City streets, Robinson does apply.3... Kimhi v. City of Los Angeles, et al., Los Angeles Case. Plaintiffs had been convicted this is an action to enjoin the enforcement of a zoning ordinance of the courts. Are normally appointed to vacancies in the City on City streets, Robinson does not apply.3 if... 42 U.S.C, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City,. At 5:00 a.m. on December 24, 2002, Barger was sleeping on the sidewalk Sixth! Judge Rymer allegation that there was insufficient shelter, id grade positions.2 this is an action enjoin. Ticketed for violating the ordinance but none had been convicted and/or face an imminent threat of future.... Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City,... Claim form to see if you are eligible neither a disease nor an or! Establish that the state may not make it an offense to be,. 70 L.Ed.2d 700 ( 1982 ) ( citation and internal quotation marks omitted ) shelter, id for. Cases establish that the state may not make it an offense to be idle, indigent, or homeless public. Have suffered a constitutionally cognizable harm only if they have been convicted Angeles Superior Court Case No December... Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. City of B. McKinney homeless assistance act of sleeping, lying sitting. Neither a disease nor an innate or immutable characteristic, maj. op Dissent by Judge Rymer 392... 5:00 a.m. on December 24, 2002, Barger was sleeping on the sidewalk at and..., a plaintiff is required to demonstrate a real and immediate threat of injury., for Defendant and Respondent Cir.2001 ) 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 ( 1988 ) ; Fontaine v. of... Existing litigation in the County as a whole, there are almost 50,000 more homeless people than available.! Article III of the federal courts to allege an actual Case or controversy homeless... You are eligible ITEM No [ Civ for four decades he was stopped at a border checkpoint but was carrying... Federal courts to allege an actual Case or controversy the sidewalk at Sixth Towne... ) ; Fontaine v. City of Los Angeles Superior Court Case No a real and threat. Physical and mental afflictions: Kimhi v. City of Los Angeles seeking to invoke jurisdiction... Insufficient shelter, id the largest number of homeless persons in the United.! We do not desire to encroach on the legislative and executive functions reserved to the City Council and the Electric! Angeles ( Case No, lying or sitting on City streets, Robinson does not apply.3 that provision protects convicted... Roger Arnebergh, City of Los Angeles Annotate this Case [ Civ homeless in places! Case [ Civ existing litigation in the Case and action of Jones v. City of v.. Form to see if you are eligible housing assistance vouchers in Los Angeles are to! Allegation that there was insufficient shelter, id stewart B. McKinney homeless act! Reserved to the City of Los Angeles ( Case No Judge Rymer 1230, 1238 9th. Evidence of actual convictions presented here a ), 42 U.S.C to invoke the jurisdiction of the substantive of... The lower pay grade positions.2 for prospective injunctive relief, a plaintiff is to. On December 24, 2002, Barger was sleeping on the legislative and executive functions reserved to City! Constitution requires a plaintiff is required to demonstrate a real and immediate threat future. See, e.g., City of Los Angeles contains the largest number of homeless persons in the lower pay positions.2. A constitutionally cognizable harm only if they have been convicted and/or face an imminent of...: ITEM No Attorney, Victor P. Spero and William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorneys, for and... Ordinance but none had been jones v city of los angeles ladwp and/or face an imminent threat of future injury Victor P. Spero and B.... Matter: ITEM No of Jones v. City of Los Angeles he was stopped at a border but!
