Plaintiffs dismiss Tenderloin quality-of-life lawsuit

SAN FRANCISCO (May 5, 2026) — San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu announced today that Plaintiffs in a Tenderloin quality-of-life lawsuit have dismissed their case against the City and County of San Francisco. The Plaintiffs, a group of Tenderloin residents and business owners, originally filed the lawsuit in March 2024 over concerns about crime and street conditions in the Tenderloin.

Last month, a federal judge denied Plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction order seeking to restrict how the City addresses substance use, homelessness, and crime in the Tenderloin. The Court found Plaintiffs did not have standing to bring their claims and noted that the City’s evidence showed conditions in the Tenderloin had been improving over time.

“We are glad to put this matter behind us,” said City Attorney Chiu. “The City remains committed to working with residents to improve safety and expand opportunity in the Tenderloin. Lawsuits like this waste resources, and the courts are not equipped to step into the shoes of policymakers. When residents and government work together, we get better results. Tremendous credit goes to our Police Department for keeping the Tenderloin and San Francisco safe.”

"Since we took office, our administration has transformed the city’s homelessness and behavioral health work through Breaking the Cycle. And we're tackling those issues with the urgency they deserve," said Mayor Daniel Lurie. "There is still work to do, but our city is finally moving in the right direction as a city, and I will be relentless until every family in the Tenderloin and across San Francisco has the safe and clean streets they deserve."

"While we're pleased the city can move past this legal matter, the SFPD will remain laser-focused on addressing street conditions in the Tenderloin and surrounding areas," said SFPD Chief Derrick Lew. "Our residents and business owners deserve clean and safe streets, and our officers will be relentlessly enforcing the law, making arrests for drug-related activity and doing everything in our power to build on the progress we've made."

Background

Law enforcement agencies regularly meet with Tenderloin businesses and residents through the Drug Enforcement Agency Coordination Center (DMACC), a multi-agency task force that works to address street conditions and crime associated with drug dealing and drug use. As a part of DMACC, agencies seek input from community stakeholders on the best ways to serve the community.

This collaboration has led to several safety improvements and policy initiatives, including the City’s nighttime safety ordinance that prohibits certain retail stores in high-traffic, drug-market areas from operating late at night.

Through DMACC, SFPD continues to conduct enforcement operations in the Tenderloin, including arresting drug dealers and seizing narcotics. SFPD continues to partner with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Since DMACC’s inception in 2023, SFPD officers have seized over 1,266 pounds of narcotics, including 359 pounds of fentanyl, 194 pounds of methamphetamine, 69 pounds of cocaine, and 30 pounds of heroin. Additionally, officers have made 14,283 arrests, including 2,554 arrests of drug dealers.

The City Attorney’s Office has also worked closely with SFPD enforce the nighttime safety ordinance and shut down problematic corner stores that engage in illegal gambling and fuel drug activity.

Conditions in the Tenderloin have steadily improved thanks to these existing and new initiatives, including law enforcement operations, housing and public health services, and enforcement actions against businesses contributing to illegal activity.

Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in March 2024 and eventually sought a preliminary injunction order that could have prevented City officials from employing certain public health strategies to address substance use.

In March 2026, the Court denied that motion, finding that Plaintiffs failed to establish standing, did not show ongoing or imminent injury caused by the City’s policies, did not linked the City’s policies to the conditions they described, and did not explain how the injunction they sought would fix those conditions. Several Plaintiffs acknowledged improvements in the neighborhood, and the Court also recognized that Plaintiffs’ allegations were not supported by current photographs of actual conditions.

City policymakers hold the exclusive authority to set policy on a variety of issues, including allocating law‑enforcement resources, determining when to connect individuals with social services rather than making arrests, and addressing quality‑of‑life concerns. Courts are not appropriate forums to resolve policy disagreements of this kind, and private parties generally cannot sue a municipality simply because they disagree with its discretionary policy decisions.

The case was dismissed with prejudice on April 28, meaning the Plaintiffs cannot revive their claims. The case is Roe, et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Superior Court, No. 4:24-cv-01562-JST.