Examiner Editorial: Sanctuary policy threatened by misguided fans

Rarely has the fantasy outlook of The City’s more avant-garde social activists been as blatant as in Supervisor David Campos’ proposed new ordinance watering down San Francisco’s 20-year-old sanctuary policy. Campos — apparently backed by a veto-proof Board of Supervisors majority — wants to prohibit local law enforcement from reporting to federal immigration authorities any illegal immigrant youths arrested on felony charges unless they are actually convicted.

At first glance, this might seem fairly justified, especially when promoted as a protection for some decent kids who might otherwise get deported for a minor offense or just walking down a block during a gang fight. Campos, a Harvard University-educated attorney, was himself an illegal immigrant from Guatemala at 14.

Unfortunately, Campos’ well-meaning
plan would blatantly violate federal laws, likely raising red flags that may force crackdowns that could jeopardize the continued existence of San Francisco’s entire sanctuary policy. And that certainly is not what the supervisor and his allies had in mind. In fact, a federal grand jury investigation of earlier sanctuary leniency is already happening.

Plus, the legally shaky Campos amendment would invite costly lawsuits and threaten the outcome of costly lawsuits now under way. These warnings were detailed in a confidential memo by City Attorney Dennis Herrera, which Mayor Gavin Newsom has freely admitted releasing to the press in order to alert the public about the ugly consequences of openly weakening sanctuary practices.

Newsom’s controversial move became a weeklong sideshow temporarily overshadowing the main issue of Campos’ destructive proposal. San Francisco voters passed the original sanctuary measure in the late 1980s, largely to help undocumented Central American immigrants fleeing the bloody civil wars in their homelands. But as years passed, some questionable procedures never written into the ordinance became common practice.

Undocumented teens arrested — or even convicted — on charges including drug sales or violent crimes were officially shielded from federal immigration authorities. They were flown back to their homelands on San Francisco’s dime or sent to Southern California halfway houses that couldn’t be easier to escape.

This policy exploded in The City’s face when suspected MS-13 gang member Edwin Ramos — saved from deportation by the sanctuary policy after juvenile arrests — allegedly murdered Anthony Bologna and two of his sons in a pointless 2008 traffic confrontation. Newsom quickly ordered local law enforcement to tell immigration authorities about all undocumented youths arrested on suspicion of felonies, which is what Campos wants to overturn.

It’s possible for reasonable persons to take opposing sides about the sanctuary policy. What’s not possible is for anyone — even the most fervent supporter — to seriously argue that Campos’ amendment would help the policy or The City.