San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins used a Tuesday morning press conference to lay out a new strategy aimed at changing the California Constitution. The DA said the state Supreme Court’s April 2026 decision in In re Kowalczyk has narrowed the circumstances under which judges can hold defendants in jail before trial, limiting pre‑trial detention primarily to violent crimes.
Impact of the Kowalczyk ruling
Under the Kowalczyk ruling, judges must now determine that a defendant fits the state constitution’s narrow definition of a “no‑bail” case before ordering detention. Previously, judges could also detain individuals for other reasons, such as repeated failures to appear in court. Jenkins noted that the decision has led to a sharp drop in the city’s jail population – San Francisco recorded its lowest jail count in three years on Saturday – and a surge in pre‑trial releases.
DA’s response and proposed constitutional change
“We are limited in being able to do what we need to do to keep those people from committing more theft in our stores,” Jenkins said. “We will work on this to make sure that we get the California Constitution changed so that we, as a court system, can do what we need to restrain those who refuse to follow the law.” She added that the DA’s office is preparing legislation that would give judges broader discretion to detain repeat offenders while their cases are pending.
Jenkins emphasized that the limits imposed by Kowalczyk are “rooted in our state Constitution,” and reminded listeners that “California voters have the power to change” those limits. In a follow‑up statement, she confirmed she is “working to advance legislation” but did not detail the legislative path.
City officials cite declining theft numbers
At a separate press conference on September 8, city officials highlighted a nearly 20 % decline in larceny cases so far this year. Mayor London Breed reported that San Francisco Police Department officers have made 844 retail theft arrests in the last six months, a 27 % increase over the previous six‑month period. Despite the improvement, Jenkins argued that more needs to be done to keep “the most prolific thieves” in custody while investigations continue.
Public defender’s criticism
The San Francisco Public Defender’s Office issued a statement calling the DA’s stance “disappointing,” asserting that the Kowalczyk decision affirms the fundamental constitutional principles that “people are innocent until proven guilty and have a right to due process.” The office warned that the DA’s push to expand pre‑trial detention could undermine those rights.
Next steps
Jenkins said her office is tracking re‑arrest rates of individuals released pre‑trial, noting that they have observed “a fair amount” of re‑arrests but are waiting for sufficient data before drawing firm conclusions. She concluded that the DA’s office will present its case both in court and to the public, arguing that “something does need to change.”
As the debate unfolds, San Franciscans will watch closely to see whether the proposed constitutional amendment gains traction with state legislators and voters, and how it might affect the balance between public safety and due‑process protections.
Original reporting: Mission Local — read the source article.
