SF always had a "skid row" area that was mostly alcoholics, but it was a fraction of the size it is now (it was basically a block or two). Now we have an entire neighborhood besieged with people openly using drugs, needles in their arms, smoking fentanyl with anything they can get their hands on.

Alcohol and "legal drugs" are not the problem.

I think a block or two is not correct, especially when you correct for population growth and the policy that started shipping them in from other parts of the city. Can you show me population statistics for skid row and overall city homeless compared to the rest of the city/state/country over time?

I don't doubt that opioids have contributed, but alcohol and other legal drugs are a major problem too. If this ruling is based on government caused harm, then it would require investigating the availability of alcohol due to policy too.

I'm from SF, I know exactly where "skid row" was, and I also worked there for about a decade. Nobody was shipped in from other parts of the city either unless you count people moving from other counties to where meth/heroin/fentanyl was easily available.

You can count the number of people on the street, maybe 1 in 15 has an alcoholic beverage, the rest are smoking meth/fenty/heroin.

SF's problems are all about drugs.

Oh, when they say Skid Row, they mean the 50 block one in LA (the most famous one). Maybe SF is different.

It seems alcohol is still the most abused substance in the homeless population. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29852450/

AFAIK "Skid Row" is a generic term, and I did reference SF's specific area.

This is basically what you'll see every few feet in San Francisco's Tenderloin district:

https://twitter.com/DTenderloine/status/1382405311009488897

(Warning, extremely graphic)

Alcohol is certainly abused, but not as publicly as Heroin/Fentanyl....