By Joel Lau and Sophie Lyu

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration could continue its policy of only housing homeless families in tax-dollar funded motels as a last resort.

This decision overturned a previous ruling by a lower court that expanded the circumstances for which motels should be used. This included requiring the state to house homeless families with disabilities in motels if a public shelters could not adequately accommodate their needs.

Massachusetts, which is one of just two states with “right to shelter” laws, guarantees temporary housing to every homeless family forced onto the streets due to domestic violence, disaster, eviction or whose previous living conditions posed a health risk.

Colleen Arons, director of communications for the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development, wrote in an email that the Baker administration is pleased with the ruling, as it would enable the Department of Housing and Community Development to better serve Boston’s homeless population.

“The Administration believes homelessness is a human tragedy and that sheltering homeless families in motel rooms is the most disruptive and least effective way of meeting this tragedy,” Arons wrote. “Today’s ruling validates the Department’s efforts to work closely with individual families to best meet their needs.”

However, Ruth Bourquin, an attorney who works with the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and represents the homeless families suing the government in this case, said forcing families with disabilities into shelters would separate them from the resources they need and worsen their already challenging situations.

“Distant placements, or placements in forms of shelter that are inconsistent with disabilities,” Bourquin said, “force parents to lose jobs, children to lose continuity in their schools and families to lose the support of family members, child care providers and others in the communities they know.”

This change in policy, she said, is part of a larger initiative by the Baker administration to move as many homeless families from expensive temporary housing in motels to more permanent housing situations that mimic a traditional home life.

Arons explained that, over the last five years, the DHCD has increased the capacity in its shelters with an additional 1,700 family housing units and has “worked collaboratively” with Baker since he entered office to reduce the number of families living in taxpayer-funded motel rooms from 1,500 to less than 40.

Although Bourquin said she thinks this initiative was a “worthy goal,” she said the state has failed to account for the needs of people with disabilities.

“As a result, families who are struggling with the impact of disabilities and other challenges are left in … shelters with very troubling conditions, including rodents, cockroaches, mold, etc.,” Bourquin said.

The crowded, “congregate” nature of public shelters, Bourquin said, only serves to exacerbate the condition of children who suffer from behavioral disabilities such as autism.

Dan Martin, 34, of Dorchester, said he thinks it’s important that Massachusetts keeps the well-being of its homeless and disabled populations in mind.

“This is a big issue where I live,” Martin said. “There’s homeless people on every block, and it’s especially hard seeing them when the storms start to roll in, crouching on park benches with their thin blankets and seeing them in the mornings under a blanket of snow.”

South End resident Alex Owens said she thinks the motels are important because they give homeless people shelter from the weather and are one of the few actions Massachusetts is taking to help the homeless.

“People rely on these motels to survive,” the 33-year-old said. “Bostonians shouldn’t be complaining about the money coming from taxes. We should all be doing our part to help the homeless. Try to step into their shoes and picture how bad it really is for them.”

Bourquin said mandatory relocation could cause difficulty and harm to homeless people with disabilities.

“Breaking these connections to a family’s home community exacerbates and extends the amount of time that the family will be homeless, so it is short-sighted,” Bourquin said. “That’s why the legislature enacted laws saying families should be placed close to their home communities — laws we believe the state is not adequately following.”

Jennifer Suryadjaja and Laura Al-Bast contributed to the reporting of this story.