John Diaz:
Kate Steinle’s relatives offer their views on sanctuary city laws. Their opinions might surprise you — as well as Fox News commentators.
Jim Steinle was taken aback by a recent Chronicle letter to the editor that accused the family of using the fatal shooting of his 32-year-old daughter Kate on the San Francisco waterfront to attack the “sanctuary city concept.”
“We didn’t have a stance against sanctuary city,” he said. “We wanted to make darn sure that people understand that, because that’s kind of the hot-button issue locally.”
Almost from the moment it was revealed that the suspected gunman was a seven-time felon who re-entered this country illegally — and was released from San Francisco jail without any notice to federal immigration authorities — Kate’s name was invoked in calls to punish sanctuary cities.
Donald Trump was among the first. So was Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, who said there was “no question the uberliberal sanctuary city policy of San Francisco directly led to the murder of Kate Steinle.” On July 23, her name became the clarion call behind the 241-179 U.S. House vote to cut federal funding to local governments that do not comply fully with federal immigration authorities.
The Steinle family wanted to separate themselves from that frenzy. They chose a forum — this column — where their views could be expressed with the nuance and context that gets lost in the rapid-fire exchange of cable shows and news conferences. On the eve of their phone conversation with me, they decided that Kate’s brother, Brad, would be their primary spokesperson. But her father and mother had plenty to say, too.
“We realize that when (then-Mayor) Dianne Feinstein first drafted the policy, the original purpose was to protect lawabiding immigrants to allow them to call and report crimes and go to the hospital” without fear of deportation, Brad said. “The initial thought was to keep them safe — the law-abiding immigrants — and to keep the public safe as a whole.”
Jim added: “It was done for all the right reasons. We’re a country of kind people and people were being persecuted in Central America. I get what she did and I agree with it.”
Liz Sullivan, Kate’s mother, said, “It was never meant to be a safe harbor for violent criminals. That’s the bottom line.”
They’re right, of course. The Steinles were well versed on the evolution of sanctuary city law in San Francisco and the concept that trust between immigrants who don’t have legal status and local police enhances public safety by encouraging witnesses and victims to come forward. They also recognized that the 2013 “Due Process for All” ordinance severely limited the ability of the sheriff to honor requests from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold suspects up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled jail release — but it did not prevent the sheriff from notifying the feds in advance of release.
They know that nothing in city law prevented Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi’s department from giving a heads up requested by ICE before freeing Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez before he allegedly shot and killed Kate as she was strolling on Pier 14 with her father on July 1.
“That is 100 percent the stance we’re taking,” Brad said. “The sheriff took it upon himself to draft a policy that essentially forbid his deputies from cooperating or communicating with ICE in any way. It resulted in the release of this violent felon.”
Brad was referring to the March 13 memo from Mirkarimi to all department personnel that prohibited contact with ICE. The sheriff has contended that his policy was a fair interpretation of the Due Process for All law — a point that has been heavily disputed by, among others, Mayor Ed Lee, who signed the law. That policy could be — should be— repealed with a stroke of the sheriff ’s pen. So far, he has stubbornly refused, leading to legislation by Supervisor Mark Farrell to etch into law the assurance that the sheriff can flag the feds
“For the news outlets, it’s all about the story, it’s about captivating an audience. We realize that. The story of ‘Steinles versus sanctuary city’ sounds like a much bigger story than ‘The Steinles versus a policy that the sheriff of San Francisco took it upon himself to draft and put into effect.’ That’s where it’s gotten a bit out of control.”
Brad Steinle, brother of slain woman
about violent felons in his custody.
“Sanctuary city has been hijacked by the Mirkarimi types,” Jim said.
The other outgrowth of this truly horrific and eminently preventable crime has been the call for “Kate’s Law.” As originally promoted by O’Reilly, it would have imposed a mandatory minimum five-year prison term on any convicted felon who returned to the U.S. after deportation. O’Reilly has since tempered his call to include only aggravated felonies, which includes violent crimes, but also offenses such as passport alteration, burglary or failure to appear in court.
The Steinles are very clear that they support the tough penalties of “Kate’s Law” for violent offenders.
It’s enlightening to listen to them instead of the opportunistic demagogues who purport to speak for them and the loved one they lost.