At the July 17 hearing, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen declared he will soon file a final judgment on the Berkeley Homeless Union’s lawsuit against the city of Berkeley, which primarily concerns the provision of disability accommodations to certain residents of the unhoused encampment at Eighth and Harrison streets prior to a sweep.

Last year, the city of Berkeley appealed the lawsuit to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging BHU’s capacity to sue the city and the accommodation claims of the lawsuit, among others. Chen stated at the July 17 hearing that he approves of the 9th Circuit’s review of his decision.

Simultaneously, BHU is pushing for another preliminary injunction to prevent the city from sweeping the encampment on the basis of a fire hazard — the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California will be deciding the issue Aug. 13.

Here is the timeline of the acceleration in the suit.

The temporary restraining order and surprise sweep

The lawsuit began Feb. 11, 2025, when BHU filed for a temporary restraining order against a potential encampment sweep by the city. The TRO, following a Jan. 7 notice by the city regarding an impending sweep, alleged the city failed to provide reasonable accommodations for individuals who had made requests under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Following the expiration of the TRO on May 23, the city conducted a surprise sweep June 3, which was halted by Chen, ruling the Jan. 7 notice was not sufficient notification for sweeping the encampment months later.

At the June 10 hearing following the halted sweep, Chen provided “limited injunctive relief” to the residents at the encampment, supplying a 60-day window for BHU and the city to determine reasonable ADA accommodations. The rest of the encampment residents were not protected under this injunction.

Despite an ex parte application by BHU to limit an impending partial sweep of the encampment, at the Sept. 12 hearing Chen allowed the city to sweep the east side of the encampment on 8th and Harrison streets, except for the 19 individuals who had filed for ADA accommodations.

Appeals and substantive ruling in spring

Before any judgment was written, the city filed its first appeal in November. The city and the various defendants submitted their opening brief for the appealed suit July 27 of this year; BHU and the rest of the plaintiffs have yet to do so.

On Jan. 13, Chen had ordered the city and BHU to continue discussing reasonable accommodations while submitting documents to the court for the purpose of determining a judgment on the case. He set a hearing date of March 20 for continuing discussions surrounding a judgment.

However, the city posted a notice to sweep the encampment in February — and later in March — citing the outbreak of leptospirosis, a potentially fatal bacterial disease, at the encampment. Though the sweep was called off, BHU subsequently filed for an emergency hearing and obtained a TRO at the March 11 hearing. On March 20, the TRO was extended through April 8.

On April 3, Chen allowed the city to sweep the entire encampment, given that residents’ property will be relocated; in case their property must be disposed of due to possible contamination, residents are to be provided a tent as well as other “survival gear” such as sleeping bags or clothing. Chen also ordered the city only to take action against vehicles at the encampment as a last resort.

The order also required the city to grant the amount of safe living space required for each of the ADA claimants, exempting these individuals’ tents from the city’s rule that prohibits unhoused individuals from letting their possessions reach beyond a 3-by-3-foot area. This exemption was partially granted to non-ADA claimants as well, as long as they didn’t obstruct the sidewalk.