San Francisco City Attorney Targets Critics in Contentious Drug Policy Legal Battle

San Francisco, CA – The City Attorney's office is actively deposing vocal critics of its drug policies, including citizen journalist Omar Ward, known as "JJ Smith," and Randy Shaw, Executive Director of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic. This legal action comes amid an ongoing lawsuit, JANE ROE et al vs. City and County of San Francisco, challenging the city's approach to the drug and homelessness crisis in the Tenderloin district.

Randy Shaw, who initiated the recent social media post, stated, "SF's City Attorney spent 6 hours deposing JJ Smith @war24182236 because of his videos. His office will soon depose me. It appears anyone who publicly opposes drug handouts is a City Attorney target." This highlights a growing legal confrontation between city officials and activists over harm reduction strategies.

Omar Ward, under his online persona "JJ Smith," gained significant public attention for his raw video documentation of drug use and homelessness in the Tenderloin. His footage, often going viral, has been praised by supporters, including Shaw, for exposing the harsh realities of the crisis and holding politicians accountable. Ward's videos notably captured a direct confrontation with Governor Gavin Newsom regarding the fentanyl epidemic, an interaction viewed over 1 million times.

The lawsuit alleges that the City's policies, including the distribution of fentanyl smoking kits and the operation of facilities like the now-closed Tenderloin Center, have contributed to a public nuisance. Plaintiffs, comprising Tenderloin residents and businesses, contend these actions have fostered an environment where illegal drug dealing and use are concentrated, leading to unsafe and unsanitary public spaces. The court filing reveals allegations that the City "encouraged addicts to go there to consume fentanyl and other narcotics," and that "narcotics sales and use surged" as a result.

The San Francisco City Attorney's office is defending these policies, asserting governmental immunity and arguing that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated sufficiently severe harm to warrant legal intervention under state-created danger claims. The legal proceedings continue to unfold, with the court recently denying the City's motion to dismiss state law claims, acknowledging allegations of affirmative conduct by the City contributing to the nuisance. This legal battle underscores the deep divisions within San Francisco regarding the most effective strategies to address its escalating drug and homelessness crises.