San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said it best: “We will continue to be victims of every joke and attack on Fox News, and rightly so.”
She was referring to the California Supreme Court’s decision last month that bail for supposedly “non-violent” crimes must be “feasible.”
That means that hordes of repeat offenders will go free.
Drug dealers arrested dozens of times; retail gangs who steal again and again because they know they will not be prosecuted; petty thieves who make residents stick signs in their car windows begging for mercy; all would be eligible for easy release.
This is the worst possible outcome for a city that is making a comeback.
Over the past few years, San Francisco has experienced a decline in crime.
First, voters threw out radical District Attorney Chesa Boudin in a recall election in 2022. Boudin had come to power as the anti-police movement Black Lives Matter was gaining momentum. He vowed not to prosecute so-called “quality of life” crimes such as public urination.
His tenure was a failed experiment in “criminal justice reform” that went too far.
Brooke Jenkins took over and immediately took a more sensible approach. Voters also replaced the left-wing London Breed with the more pragmatic Daniel Lurie.
As the AI boom brought jobs and revenue back to the city, San Francisco started to feel like itself again.
All that is now in danger. Bail shouldn’t be impossible, but “attainable” bail is just a key to the prison door.
The California Supreme Court has long been one of the most far-left courts in the country. Their decision reflects a deep disregard for law enforcement, for the rule of law and for the well-being of the people of San Francisco.
Of the seven judges on the state’s highest court, only one was appointed by a Republican. The rest were appointed by Democrats Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom. Newsom also has a vacancy to fill. He will surely appoint another radical as he looks to appease his party’s base ahead of the 2028 presidential primaries.
Curiously, none of the debates in the governorship race have included questions about judicial appointments. But choosing judges is one of the most important duties of a governor.
The “feasible” bail decision is yet another reminder of the commitment to our state in November.
