Thomas J. Main has written an important history of how the idea of the right to shelter became embedded in New York City law, and the decades-long battle between the courts, the city and activists over what it meant for homelessness policy. As Main shows, shelter as a right originated in a consent decree issued on 26 August 1981 in response to the court case Callahan v. Carey. At the same time, without reaching a decision, the court skirted the legal question of whether shelter was a guaranteed right. In the end, New York City was ‘obliged to follow a de facto policy that assumes such a right’ (p. 28). The fact that Callahan and subsequent cases did not speak directly to the issue actually helped ensure that the idea persevered. According to Main, ‘a combination of mutually reinforcing incremental changes produced a non-incremental change’, i.e., a right to shelter for individuals and families, that included ‘detailed quality specifications’ and ‘would empower the advocates of the homeless to drive policy for years to come’ (p. 51).

Through its many twists and turns through the city bureaucracy and court system, New York City's homelessness policy went through ‘three distinct stages’ between the 1970s and the new millennium. The initial ‘phase’ of ‘entitlement’ or ‘right to shelter’ led to the homeless population skyrocketing in the 1980s. As a result, questions arose over whether recipients of shelter should have to seek employment, obtain help for drug and alcohol abuse or search for permanent housing. This next ‘phase’ involved a turn ‘in a paternalistic direction’, a process aided by the move to non-profit shelters, which could place requirements on individuals seeking shelter. As Main argues, ‘privatization made paternalism possible’ as homelessness policies moved away from ‘entitlement’ and touted ‘clients’ responsibilities’ to improve their own situations (p. 6). The problem of homelessness still remained, however, so city officials looked for ways to move beyond paternalism in search of a solution. Relying on the research of Dennis Culhane, New York City moved to help the ‘chronically homeless’, who though small in numbers made up a large share of the homeless, through a policy of ‘post-paternalism’ (p. 8). In the 1990s and 2000s, so-called supportive housing became the primary tool used to help the disabled homeless and others in need of medical and social services. Many of the homeless, however, refused to accept rehabilitation as a condition of their being sheltered, which forced city officials to provide housing first and then encourage, though not always require, the homeless to seek help for their problems.

Main illustrates how the question of a basic right to shelter required a reckoning with both the quality and permanency of shelter. After the Callahan decree, ‘the main thrust of city efforts was devoted to expanding capacity on a catch-as-catch-can basis’, which led to questionable ‘quality standards’ in many of the shelters (p. 37). As shelter conditions received additional attention, other proposals appeared calling for the construction of additional units to house the homeless. Mayor Ed Koch introduced a plan in 1985, known as the ‘Ten-Year Housing Plan’, to build 150,000 housing units by 1997 for low- and middle-income families. When completed, close to 10 per cent went to homeless residents. As Main shows, ‘preventing homelessness’ became the new catchword of homelessness advocates in the 1990s (p. 144). Thus, when Michael Bloomberg became mayor, supportive housing and Housing First became the key elements of his homelessness policy. The former involved finding homes for disabled persons that also provided on-site care, while the latter offered families housing immediately, rather than force them to enter a rehabilitation programme prior to obtaining a permanent home. In the end, however, Bloomberg reduced the ability of the homeless to move out of the shelters when he denied them Section 8 vouchers to help with rent payments beginning in 2004.

Despite the ebb and flow of homelessness policy in New York City, Main's most important contribution is showing how even in the midst of conservative and neoliberal governance, one of the nation's largest cities continued to look for ways to care for its homeless.