We were surprised to hear, at long last, some element of an on-the-record acknowledgement of the Trump regime’s damage from the San Francisco Mayor’s office on June 13th, nearly 5 months after Trump was sworn in and started his dismantling of the U.S. government.
This consisted of an affirmation that San Francisco is a sanctuary city and that he was against the inhumane practice of family separation.
On X, just 3 days earlier, Mayor Daniel Lurie expressed the same sentiment in a post, in the most clear statement on the Trump regime’s actions that we have ever found from the Mayor.
“I know there is tremendous anxiety in communities across our city….I have been and will continue to be clear that these federal immigration enforcement tactics are intended to instill fear, and they make our city less safe. …I am coordinating with local law enforcement, and we have activated our Emergency Operations Center,” Lurie wrote.
However, not only were these mere acknowledgements, which should primarily concern the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD), they haven’t manifested as a real stance on ICE raids, nor have translated to any evidence of enforcement of the sanctuary city ordinance.
On July 8, as reported by Mission Local, “agents used pepper spray, shoved people to the ground, and, in one instance, brandished a rifle. A black SUV carrying a detained immigrant sped through half a dozen protesters crowded near its front. A woman holding onto its hood was thrown off.”
Using their batons and screaming expletives at protestors, these ICE agents not only conducted themselves in a way unbecoming of federal officers.
While this is the most violent incident to date, there have been various other violent clashes escalated by ICE using force against peaceful protestors.
In response to the use of force against civilians that occurred, Deputy Chief Derrick Lew said, “…we can’t just sit by and watch our fellow law enforcement agent or officer get hurt.”
Not only is this a concerning and damaging precedent for San Franciscans, its various expressions have only incited violence from peaceful protestors and caused unnecessary arrests and detentions.
Arguably, the most important principle of a sanctuary city in action (and not just in word) is the uninvolvement of city law enforcement officers in the detaining and, most recently, abduction of perceived immigrants.
In an article by ABC7, Bill Hing, a migration studies professor at USF, said that under sanctuary city ordinances, “the police are not supposed to go with ICE to arrest people for immigration violations.”
This standard has been reiterated by Lurie.
“Under our city’s longstanding policies, local law enforcement does not participate in federal immigration enforcement. Those are our policies, and they make our city safer,” Lurie wrote.
Sanctuary city ordinances, which exist around the country, have served as a reassurance that immigrants can rely on their local police departments to keep them safe, so that they can report crime and interact with officers, not to be profiled or reported on based on their immigration statuses.
If the SFPD has taken on the gross task of acting as the bodyguards of often violent federal agents, they are essentially assisting in the mission of ICE’s deportation agenda, which violates the very concept of a sanctuary city.
Lurie’s reiteration of simple definitions cannot serve as official positions on such a huge issue plaguing our city, especially in the context of violent ICE agents and SFPD’s mass arrests, which have been visible efforts to protect these agents. While Lurie broadly repeats what is currently city policy, he is quite vague about what the city will do to not only address protestors’ concerns, but most importantly, how they will keep San Franciscans safe from violent federal agents and mitigate the fear and anxiety he mentioned in his X statement.
His continued silence on the mistreatment and cruelty that profiled immigrants face is not only disheartening, but it is dangerous for allowing ICE to continue its separation of families, nighttime raids, and allowing SFPD to continue its involvement in the process.
*This editorial was written by a member of the SF NAACP Youth Council. The Youth Council executive committee voted in agreement.
San Francisco NAACP Youth Council 
Leave a comment