This is a bit of follow-up to this situation, although the question is different and things got much worse.
According to a recent poll, 40% of San Francisco residents are considering moving out of the city. Many attribute this in part to the SF DA, who even before COVID publicly announced that he won't prosecute quality of life crimes, as well as shoplifting under $950.
If harmed, what can SF residents legally do to reintroduce such prosecutions?
A lawsuit would be unsuccessful. Prosecutors have discretion to prioritize whichever offenses they think are most important, and they are generally immune from civil liability.
This is a political grievance, and it comes with a political remedy; voters can recall the DA or vote for a new one when his term ends.
Almost every crime has a civil counterpart for the victim to sue for a judgement, and certainly any private property or personal violence related crime does. Victims of crimes can sue the perpetrator on their own if they have the resources to do so. As a practical reality, suing a homeless person to get back damages is a waste of money since the defendant won't have any money to pay, but a declaratory judgement against stealing or a restraining order could be used to keep the defendant away in the future, or give a victim more recourse if the defendant attacks them or their property again because they are now violating a court order. Judges can incarcerate a person in contempt of court independent of the District Attorney, though this again relies on the willingness of the government to enforce its own laws.
