A class-action lawsuit alleging Los Angeles County fails to provide safe and stable housing to transition-age foster youth with mental health disabilities will move forward, federal judges ruled this week.
Ocean S. v. Los Angeles County, filed in 2023, alleges that the Department of Children and Family Services too often fails to provide “safe and stable” homes for older teens and young adults in foster care, pushing many into homelessness and sometimes leading to hospitalization or physical and sexual assault. Seven named plaintiffs further allege they were denied behavioral health care and basic support while in the county’s custody.
Defendants sought to have the case dismissed, but on Friday, a panel of judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected that attempt.
“Thousands of young people in L.A. County’s foster care system sleep in their cars, couchsurf with strangers, and struggle to access mental health care — not because the law allows it, but because County and State agencies have ignored their legal obligations for years,” a press release states. “Now, a federal appeals court has ruled that seven of those young people have the right to hold those agencies accountable.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Children and Family Services said the agency “respects the ruling” and is “closely reviewing the court’s decision and evaluating next steps.”
“The county remains profoundly committed to supporting young people on their journeys toward healing, stability and healthy relationships,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
The lawsuit was filed by nonprofit legal advocacy groups Children’s Rights and Alliance for Children’s Rights, along with Public Counsel and the Los Angeles-based private firm Munger, Tolles and Olson. The plaintiffs are 16- to 21-year-old L.A. foster youth who have mental health disabilities.
Their lawsuit alleges a host of systemic issues, including a lack of available and appropriate housing options for transition-aged youth, abrupt and arbitrary discharges from housing programs. Several of the named plaintiffs allege they became homeless after being pushed out of housing programs for minor violations like messy rooms or having unauthorized guests.
In one case, a plaintiff states the department pointed her toward a domestic violence shelter, rather than finding her new housing within the foster care system. In another, a plaintiff alleges the child welfare agency tried to close his extended foster care case for failing to meet education and employment requirements, despite the fact that he was homeless while in county custody.
Plaintiffs seek systemic changes to address current gaps: safe housing, mental health services and support that accounts for trauma and other struggles. They also seek to end what they call “discriminatory policies and practices” of “screening out” youth with disabilities from housing programs, and not offering accommodations and related supportive services. They aim to establish “enforceable standards” for teens and young adults with mental health disabilities in the county’s care.
In 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in the case, suggesting that local policies leading to “unnecessary segregation” of youth with mental health disabilities violated the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.
“Youth with disabilities who do not receive the critical services that they need to thrive in the community often end up in a vicious cycle of institutionalization,” federal attorney Martin Estrada stated in a press release. “Under the law, people with disabilities deserve to live and receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, such as in their homes and communities.”
Lawyers for the plaintiffs praised the recent court of appeals ruling, which they said affirmed their clients’ right to fight for these changes in federal court.
“We hope the County and State will stop spending resources trying to evade accountability and start working toward real solutions,” said Grant Davis-Denny, a partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. “Because with each passing day, young people in their care go unhoused and are denied the mental health services they need.”
