Los Angeles’s efforts to address the growing crisis of homelessness and abandoned recreational vehicles used as shelter have hit a significant roadblock. A Superior Court judge has halted the city’s plan to dismantle and remove these RVs, citing a lack of legal authority. The ruling, delivered on Thursday, February 22, 2026, represents a victory for advocates who argue the city’s actions would disproportionately harm vulnerable populations. The core of the dispute centers on Assembly Bill 630, a state law intended to streamline the removal of derelict RVs, and whether its provisions extend to the city of Los Angeles itself.
The legal challenge underscores the complex interplay between state legislation, local ordinances, and the constitutional rights of individuals experiencing homelessness. Los Angeles County, encompassing 88 cities and over 10 million residents, has struggled for years with a burgeoning homeless population, many of whom rely on RVs as a last resort for shelter. The city’s attempt to implement AB 630 was framed as a public health and safety measure, addressing concerns about sanitation, crime, and the obstruction of public spaces. However, critics contend that the policy would simply displace individuals without providing adequate alternatives, exacerbating an already dire situation. This legal setback throws the city’s strategy into uncertainty and raises questions about the future of similar initiatives across California.
Judge Curtis A. Kin’s two-page ruling determined that AB 630, as currently written, grants authority only to the counties of Los Angeles and Alameda – not to the individual cities within those counties. The bill, signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom in October 2025, increased the threshold for vehicle disposal from $500 to $4,000, allowing these counties to bypass the more complex process of auctioning off abandoned vehicles. The intention was to expedite the removal of inoperable RVs, but the judge found that the legislation did not explicitly extend this authority to municipalities like the City of Los Angeles. This distinction is crucial, as it limits the scope of the law and prevents cities from independently enacting similar programs.
Legal Challenge and City Response
The lawsuit that triggered the judge’s ruling was brought by the CD11 Coalition for Human Rights, a group representing individuals and organizations advocating for the rights of unhoused people in Los Angeles. The coalition argued that the city was “recklessly charging ahead” with a program it lacked the legal power to execute, potentially leading to the seizure and destruction of essential shelter for vulnerable residents. Attorney Shayla Myers, representing the coalition, stated that the judge’s decision affirmed the clear meaning of the law: “county means county, not city.” The CD11 Coalition had previously given the city an opportunity to reconsider its approach, but the city attorney’s office continued to pursue the legal challenge, according to Myers, “wasting taxpayer resources all along the way.”
The City Council had previously voted 12-3 in December 2025 to instruct City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto to “immediately” implement AB 630, requesting a report within 30 days outlining a strategy for identifying and processing abandoned RVs. Councilmembers Eunisses Hernandez, Ysabel Jurado, and Hugo Soto-Martínez dissented from the vote. Following the judge’s ruling, an aide to Feldstein Soto declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation. However, City Councilmember Traci Park, whose district includes areas heavily affected by RV encampments, expressed dismay, calling the decision “another example of activist lawsuits impeding our ability to address urgent public health and safety concerns while moving people indoors.”
Park emphasized the challenges posed by inoperable RVs, citing concerns about public safety, crime, and environmental hazards. She stated that residents are “rightfully fed up” with the presence of abandoned vehicles and the potential for exploitation of homeless individuals by so-called “vanlords” – individuals who profit from renting out RVs to those without housing. Park has committed to working with state lawmakers to revise AB 630 to include the City of Los Angeles, potentially expanding the program’s reach and allowing for more aggressive enforcement.
The Broader Context of AB 630 and Homelessness in Los Angeles
Assembly Bill 630 was initially conceived as a targeted solution to address the issue of abandoned and inoperable RVs in Los Angeles and Alameda counties. Authored by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez (D-Los Angeles), the bill aimed to streamline the disposal process for vehicles valued under $4,000, reducing the administrative burden on local governments. AB 630 passed into law with the support of Mayor Karen Bass, who has prioritized addressing homelessness as a key component of her administration. Gonzalez has also introduced a new bill to expand the program to all 88 cities within Los Angeles County, seeking a more comprehensive approach to the issue.
However, the implementation of AB 630 has been met with resistance from advocates who argue that it criminalizes homelessness and fails to address the root causes of the crisis. They contend that removing RVs without providing adequate housing alternatives simply pushes individuals further to the margins, increasing their vulnerability and hindering their access to essential services. The debate over AB 630 reflects a broader tension between the desire to address public health and safety concerns and the need to protect the rights and dignity of those experiencing homelessness. The current situation in Los Angeles, with an estimated tens of thousands of unhoused residents, highlights the urgency of finding sustainable and compassionate solutions.
Gonzalez, in an interview, defended the intent of AB 630, stating that the goal was not to penalize individuals experiencing homelessness but to address criminal activity associated with some RV encampments. He cited instances of RVs being used for prostitution, drug dealing, and other crimes in his Eastside district. “The goal here is to get rid of those bad actors and get [homeless] folks the wraparound services they need,” he explained. This perspective underscores the complex challenges faced by policymakers seeking to balance competing priorities and address the multifaceted nature of homelessness.
What Happens Next?
The immediate impact of Judge Kin’s ruling is that the City of Los Angeles is currently prohibited from enforcing AB 630 and seizing or dismantling RVs. The city must now either abandon its current interpretation of the law or present a compelling legal argument to the judge justifying its authority. A hearing date has not yet been set, and the timeline for a final resolution remains uncertain. Assemblymember Gonzalez’s proposed legislation to expand AB 630 to all cities in Los Angeles County could potentially circumvent the current legal obstacle, but its passage is not guaranteed.
The case highlights the ongoing legal and political battles surrounding homelessness in California and the challenges of implementing effective solutions. The CD11 Coalition for Human Rights has vowed to continue fighting to protect the rights of unhoused individuals and ensure that any policies aimed at addressing the crisis are grounded in compassion and respect. The outcome of this legal challenge will likely have significant implications for the future of homelessness policy in Los Angeles and beyond.
Key Takeaways:
- A Los Angeles judge has blocked the city’s attempt to dismantle abandoned RVs used as shelter for homeless individuals.
- The ruling centers on Assembly Bill 630, which the judge determined only grants authority to Los Angeles and Alameda counties, not individual cities.
- Advocates for the homeless celebrated the decision, while city officials expressed dismay, citing public health and safety concerns.
- Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez is working on a new bill to expand AB 630 to all cities within Los Angeles County.
- The case underscores the complex legal and political challenges of addressing homelessness in California.
The next step in this legal battle will be determined by the City of Los Angeles’s response to the judge’s ruling and the progress of Assemblymember Gonzalez’s proposed legislation. We will continue to monitor this developing story and provide updates as they become available. Share your thoughts on this important issue in the comments below.
Worth a look