by Lupe Velez
The Trump Administration, during its short time in power, has waged strategic attacks on nearly every marginalized group in the country. It has slashed funds for health care, education, environmental protections and more. President Trump’s direct attack on the homeless population began in August of 2025, when he deployed the National Guard to clear homeless encampments in Washington, D.C. This followed his executive order on July 24, when he outlined his plan in a press conference to increase sweeps, defund harm reduction and forcibly institutionalize people struggling with substance use disorders and mental health issues, depicting D.C.’s streets as overrun with “bloodthirsty criminals” and “drugged out maniacs.” In an interview with NPR, Jesse Rabinowitz of the National Homelessness Law Center reported “an incredibly aggressive show of force” as FBI, Homeland Security, Border Patrol, Secret Service, and local police descended onto homeless encampments in Washington D.C.
While law enforcement and sweeps have long been employed as a means to criminalize unhoused people, the Trump administration’s actions signify a stronger, unified and strategic push towards stripping away their rights at the local, state and federal levels. Last year’s Supreme Court Grants Pass v. Johnson decision was instrumental in this process: It ruled that arresting homeless people for camping outside did not violate their Eighth Amendment constitutional protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
In San Francisco, encampment sweeps have been a tried and failed tactic in addressing the homelessness crisis. Former Mayor London Breed and mayors before her employed this tactic, and now Mayor Daniel Lurie is too. One of the many concerns with sweeps has been the unlawful disposal of unhoused people’s property. Just recently, the City of San Francisco finalized a settlement with the Coalition on Homelessness to a lawsuit the Coalition filed in 2022 challenging the City’s practice of throwing away unhoused people’s property during encampment sweeps. The settlement obligates the City to comply with its own “bag and tag” policy.
Trump has threatened to subject San Francisco’s unhoused population to suffer the same fate as faced in Washington, D.C. He said of San Francisco, “Now you look at what the Democrats have done to San Francisco, they’ve destroyed it. We could clean that one up too, we’ll clean that one up, too.” How likely is this to happen?
Trump is navigating shaky legal ground in sending troops to cities outside of Washington, D.C, where he is granted special authority. He had previously deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles in response to an outbreak of protests due to increased Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, and a judge found the administration’s actions to be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the military deployment to address civilian law.
Other than to issue isolated threats at troop deployment, Trump has hardly mentioned San Francisco while in office. In an interview with the New York Times, former supervisor Aaron Peskin suggested this is due to San Francisco’s right-wing billionaire takeover that has kept the City from becoming a target for the Trump administration. Perhaps because of the limited commentary, Lurie has not directly addressed Trump, but has stated “My administration has made safe and clean streets our top priority, and the results are clear: Crime is at its lowest point in decades, visitors are coming back, and San Francisco is on the rise.” It remains to be seen how Trump’s threats will unfold: cities like Chicago and Baltimore have faced a stronger barrage of threats from Trump, but have also countered his remarks more firmly than Lurie.
The outcome matters: San Francisco’s unhoused residents are facing increased sweeps, an RV ban, congested shelters, an increase in family homelessness and tirades against harm reduction. Lurie’s tenure in the mayor’s office has shown that his administration favors criminalization over permanent housing solutions. Deployment of the National Guard would only exacerbate the existing humanitarian crisis on the streets. Will Lurie stand up to Trump, or will he remain silent in hopes of the City’s growing right-leaning politics keeping him out of his crosshairs? That’s hard to say: A tyrant’s heart is fickle and the future remains unpredictable.
