SF QuorumQuorum
Back to legislation
Hearing#251070Filed
In plain English

This legislation schedules a closed session for the Board of Supervisors on October 28, 2025, to discuss legal matters involving the City and various litigation cases. The session will focus on receiving advice from the City Attorney regarding ongoing and anticipated lawsuits against the federal government and other parties.

Closed Session for the Board of Supervisors to convene on October 28, 2025, pursuant to California Government Code, Section 54956.9(a), and San Francisco Administrative Code, Section 67.10(d), for the purpose of conferring with, or receiving advice from, the City Attorney regarding the following existing litigation matters in which the City is a party: State of New Jersey, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-10139 (D. Mass.), Case No. 25-1170 (1st Cir.), Case Nos. 24A884, 24A885, 24A886 (U.S. Sup. Ct.); City and County of San Francisco, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-01350 (N.D. Cal.), Case No. 25-3889 (9th Cir.); Doctors for America, et al. v. Office of Personnel Management, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00322 (D.D.C.); American Fed. of Gov’t Employees, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-03698 (N.D. Cal.), Case Nos. 25-3293, 25-4476 (9th Cir.), Case No. 24A1174 (U.S. Sup. Ct.); King County, et al. v. Turner, et al., Case No. 2:25-00814 (W.D. Wash.), Case No. 25-3364 (9th Cir.); City of Chicago, et al. v. Dep’t of Homeland Security, et al., Case No. 25-cv-05462 (N.D. Ill.); Appalachian Voices, et al. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Case No. 25-cv-01982 (D.D.C.); County of Santa Clara, et al. v. Noem, et al., Case No. 25-cv-08330 (N.D. Cal.); and regarding anticipated litigation the City may initiate to challenge actions by the federal government as plaintiff; scheduled pursuant to the Motion contained in File No. 251069, to be considered on October 28, 2025.

Introduced: Oct 21, 2025
Final action:
Official record ↗

How it got here

This legislation originated from the need for the Board of Supervisors to confer with the City Attorney regarding various existing and anticipated litigation matters.

1
Legal Review Initiated
City Attorney

The City Attorney identified the need for the Board of Supervisors to discuss ongoing and potential litigation involving the City, prompting the introduction of a closed session.

Legislative Digest
2
Item Received and Assigned2025-10-21
Board of Supervisors

The Board of Supervisors received the motion related to the closed session and assigned it for consideration.

Action history
3
Closed Session Held2025-10-28
Board of Supervisors

The Board convened in a closed session to discuss the existing and anticipated litigation matters as outlined in the motion.

Action history

Reconstructed from attached documents & the official record

Document trail
PDF ↗

How they voted

No recorded roll-call vote yet. This item may have passed without a recorded individual vote, or is still pending.

Legislative journey

PresidentOct 21, 2025
RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED
Board of SupervisorsOct 28, 2025
·HEARD IN CLOSED SESSION