Juvenile sanctuary policy moving forward
By Christie CheckettsContributing Writer
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors Public Safety Committee approved an ordinance that will modify the city’s sanctuary policy in a 2-1 vote on Oct. 5.
As the policy currently stands, undocumented youths are reported to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement when arrested for felony crimes. The ordinance will protect youths from being reported until they have been convicted, providing them with rights to due process.
“The mayor reformed the sanctuary city policy last year in order to protect it,” said Nathan Ballard, spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom. “Now the board of supervisors is pouring gasoline all over it and lighting a match.”
Newsom promised to veto the ordinance regardless of the board’s veto-proof majority by alleging that the ordinance breaks federal law.
“If Newsom believes that, he is mistaken,” said Supervisor David Campos, who introduced the ordinance as a very narrow amendment to an existing policy. “This legislation is legally defensible and we believe it will stand any legal challenge.”
Edgar Perez, a political refugee at the time he arrived in the United States from El Salvador, attended the public meeting in support of the ordinance.
“The police were in cooperation with immigration services. We were not safe,” he said. "Turning in victims is persecution. It destroys aspirations and breaks up families.”
Keeping families together was the message that came from the supporters crowded into the overspill room at City Hall.
Federal law prohibits the city from taking action against a city employee for reporting a juvenile to federal immigration authorities.
Contention between city and federal law has sparked controversy concerning an internal city attorney memorandum leaked by Newsom, as discussed during the board meeting. The memo outlined a worst case scenario for federal legal challenges that could be levied as a result of the board's proposed sanctuary policy.
Supervisor Chris Daly said the memo was marked as privileged and confidential, and should only have been given to elected individuals. He added that never in his nine years in elected office has he seen an entire memo given to the press.
Supervisor John Avalos stated he was alarmed about the memo being leaked, and that he has asked the Ethics Committee to investigate whether any official misconduct has taken place.
“I think he did this because there are eight members of this board who are co-sponsors of this legislation,” Daly said. “Eight is the magic number in terms of the ability to override mayoral veto.”
The city attorney’s office is now in support of the ordinance, which is due to go before the full board on Oct. 20.
Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier voted against the ordinance. She is worried that pushing something forward at a citywide level, then possibly being sued and losing, would take San Francisco’s sanctuary ordinance backwards. Alioto-Pier has requested a closed meeting so supervisors could safely debate the issue of legality.
“The office would not support the ordinance if it were illegal,” Campos said. He told the board they are at a critical junction in the history of San Francisco.
“I ask my colleagues to join me on the right side of history,” he said.
