Planned increases in federal immigration enforcement in the Bay Area are currently on hold throughout the region and in major East Bay cities. not only in San FranciscoOakland Mayor Barbara Lee made the announcement Friday.
In a statement, Lee said Alameda County Sheriff Yesenia Sanchez “has confirmed in her communications” with federal immigration officials that planned operations “are currently canceled for the greater Bay Area, including Oakland.”
The announcement follows ongoing concerns about increased immigration enforcement among East Bay leaders after President Trump and San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie announced Thursday that a planned “immigration surge” had been canceled in San Francisco.
Trump and Lurie addressed San Francisco very specifically, even as additional Border Patrol agents were stationed across the bay on Coast Guard Island, which lies in the waters between Alameda and Oakland.
At a news conference following Trump's San Francisco announcement, Lee said the situation remains “fluid,” that she had not received similar assurances regarding the East Bay and that Oakland continues to prepare for tighter immigration controls in the region.
Alameda County, Dist. Atty. Ursula Jones Dixon previously warned that the announced retreat to San Francisco could be a sign that the administration wants to focus on Oakland instead, and set an example for that.
“We know they're bullying Oakland, and that's why San Francisco is suddenly off the table,” Jones Dixon said Thursday morning. “So I'm not going to stay quiet about what we know is going to happen. We know they expect Oakland is going to do something that will encourage them to set an example for us.”
The White House on Friday referred questions about the scope of the shutdown and whether it extended to the East Bay to the Department of Homeland Security, which referred The Times to Trump's statement about San Francisco on Friday – even though it did not mention the East Bay or Oakland.
In that statement, published on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote that a “surge” was planned for San Francisco starting Saturday, but he canceled it after speaking with Lurie.
Trump said Lurie “very kindly” asked Trump to “give him a chance to see if he can make a difference” in the city, and that business leaders including Nvidia's Jensen Huang and Salesforce's Marc Benioff have expressed confidence in Lurie.
Trump said he told Lurie it would be “easier” to make San Francisco safer if federal forces were sent there, but told him, “We'll see how you do.”
In recent days, Lurie has touted a decline in crime and homeless encampments in the city, and in his own statement announcing the end of the regime said he told Trump that San Francisco was “on the rise” and that “the presence of military and paramilitary immigration enforcement in our city will hinder our recovery.”
In California and elsewhere, the Trump administration has aggressively sought to expand the reach and powers of Border Patrol and federal immigration agents. Last month Justice Department fires Sacramento's top prosecutor after she told Gregory Bovino, chief of the Border Patrol's El Centro sector, that he could not conduct indiscriminate immigration raids around Sacramento this summer.
In Oakland on Thursday, a planned increase in law enforcement sparked protests near the entrance to Coast Guard Island and drew widespread condemnation from local liberal officials and immigrant rights groups.
On Thursday evening, security officers at the base opened fire on a U-Haul truck driver who was reversing the truck toward them, injuring the driver and a nearby civilian. FBI is investigating this incident.
Some liberal officials have warned that federal agents who violate the rights of Californians could face consequences — even possible arrest — from local law enforcement, prompting condemnation from federal officials.
Deputy Atty. General Todd Blanche responded with a sharp letter to Governor Gavin Newsom and others on Thursday, in which he wrote that any attempt by local law enforcement to arrest federal officials doing their jobs would be viewed by the Justice Department as “illegal and futile” and part of a “criminal conspiracy.”
Blanche wrote that the Constitution's Supremacy Clause prevents any federal law enforcement official from being “subject to state criminal charges if the alleged crime arose while he was performing federal duties” and that the Justice Department would pursue legal action against any state officials who advocate such enforcement.
“In the meantime, federal agents and officers will continue to enforce federal law, undeterred by the threat of arrest from California authorities who have abdicated their responsibility to protect their constituents,” Blanche wrote.
Threat of arrest against federal officers arose partially with San Francisco County. Atty. Brooke Jenkins, who wrote on social media that if federal agents “come to San Francisco and illegally target our residents… I will not hesitate to do my job and hold you accountable, as I do with other lawbreakers every single day.”
