Coalition on Homelessness v. City and County of San Francisco (Homeless Rights)
Description
On September 27, 2022, the Coalition on Homelessness, along with seven individual plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against the City and County of San Francisco. The suit challenged the City’s unlawful practice of destroying the personal belongings and survival gear of unhoused residents during encampment sweeps, often without adequate notice or due process, and the City’s practice of criminalizing homelessness without offering individuals access to shelter.
For years, San Francisco routinely conducted encampment sweeps during which they destroyed essential survival items, including tents, tarps, medications, IDs, and legal documents.
The lawsuit sought to end the unlawful property destruction and hold the City accountable for not complying with its “bag and tag” policy, which requires city workers to collect, label, and store personal belongings—not destroy them. These items are lifelines and tools that unhoused individuals need to survive, access care, apply for jobs, find housing, and protect their dignity.
In December 2022, the Court found evidence of the City’s routine property destruction and as well as the enforcement of laws criminalizing homelessness and issued a preliminary injunction requiring the City to comply with its “bag and tag” policy and offer available shelter options before conducting any encampment clearings.
In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson allowed cities to penalize unhoused individuals for sleeping outdoors—even when no shelter is available. However, the constitutional protections against unlawful property destruction remained intact.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Grants Pass, we have continued to prioritize the enforcement of Fourth Amendment property protections in San Francisco. In August 2024, the Court granted a motion to enforce the preliminary injunction and ordered the City to create and conduct additional training for city workers on how to handle unhoused people’s property in accordance with the City’s policy.
In July 2025, the parties reached a settlement of the lawsuit. Upon approval by the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor, the settlement will result in a court order with a five-year term.
During that five-year term, the settlement contains mechanisms to ensure that the City follows its policy on handling unhoused people’s property, and a process by which documented violations can be raised with the Court. The agreement also includes standard attorneys’ fees to support ongoing monitoring and enforcement of the settlement for the next five years.
We will update this page with more information once the settlement is approved.
The plaintiffs are represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, as well as Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP and ACLU National.
FAQ
In The News
- Reuters: San Francisco sued by homeless demanding affordable housing
- SF Chronicle Op-Ed: San Francisco’s homeless sweeps are unlawful — and the city will pay for it
- Associated Press: Homelessness in San Francisco: talk of frustration, survival
- 48 Hills: San Francisco continues homeless sweeps, during storm, defying a federal court order
- Washington Post: As storm neared, San Francisco cleared out homeless camps, group alleges
- SF Standard: Advocates Say San Francisco Violated Homeless Sweeps Ban
- Courthouse News: San Francisco can’t dodge lawsuit over homeless encampment sweeps
- Shelter-Skelter: San Francisco’S Best Strategy In Homelessness Litigation Might Be To Lose
Press Releases
- Lawsuit Filed
- Preliminary Hearing
- Court Grants Preliminary Injunction
- Statement: Violent Attack on Unhoused Resident in SF
- City’s Appeal of Preliminary Injunction
- City’s Violation of Preliminary Injunction
- Letter to City
- Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Preliminary Injunction
- Grants Pass Supreme Court Case
- Lawsuit Will Proceed
- Response to City’s Motion to Stay
- Amicus Brief Against Grants Pass Supreme Court Case
- Grants Pass Oral Arguments
Important Documents
- Press Release
- Complaint
- Our Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Supporting Declarations
- City’s Motion to Oppose Our Motion for Preliminary Injunction
- Our Reply In Support of Our Motion for Preliminary Injunction
- Preliminary Injunction Order Granted In Our Favor
- City’s Motion to Dismiss
- Our Reply to the City’s Motion to Dismiss
- City’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss
- City’s Motion to Dismiss Denied
- City’s Administrative Motion for Clarification of Preliminary Injunction Order
- Our Opposition to the City’s Administrative Motion for Clarification of Preliminary Injunction Order
- Our Administrative Motion on the City’s Noncompliance of the Order & Need for Monitoring
- City’s Opposition to our Administrative Motion on the City’s Noncompliance
- City’s Appeal of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- Our Amicus Brief In Response to the City’s Appeal of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- City’s Motion to Stay a Portion of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- Our Opposition to the City’s Motion to Stay a Portion of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- City’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Stay a Portion of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- City’s Motion to Stay a Portion of the Preliminary Injunction Order Denied
- Our First Amended Complaint
- City’s Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint
- Our Opposition to the City’s Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint
- City’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint
- Our Motion to Enforce the Preliminary Injunction Order and Supporting Declarations
- Order Regarding Assessment of the City’s Ongoing Violations of the Preliminary Injunction Order
- Our Second Amended Complaint
- The City’s Response to our Second Amended Complaint
- 9th Circuit: Order Denying City’s Motion to Modify the Preliminary Injunction Order
- 9th Circuit: Decision Affirming the District Court’s Granting of Preliminary Injunction in Our Favor
- Our Reply to the City’s Motion to Stay or Pause the Lawsuit
- Judge grants our August 2023 motion to enforce the preliminary injunction against San Francisco
Your Rights During Homeless Sweeps in San Francisco
Myths & Misconceptions



