San Francisco jail inmates sue over ignored sunlight order

A federal injunction was supposed to bring sunlight into San Francisco jail cells. Instead, inmates at County Jail 3 in San Bruno say the order is still not being followed, sending them back to court and reopening a larger fight over who is actually enforcing jail conditions inside the county system.

The legal fight traces to Brackens v. City and County of San Francisco, a class action filed in May 2019 by pretrial detainees at County Jail 3. On Aug. 1, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim’s finding that San Francisco violated detainees’ Fourteenth Amendment rights by denying them direct sunlight. The injunction requires 15 minutes of direct sunlight each day for people held longer than one year at the jail.

The record in that case described people spending up to 23.5 hours a day in their cells with no direct sunlight or outdoor recreation. One plaintiff testified that he estimated getting only 20 to 30 seconds of sunlight a year since 2016. The underlying ruling made clear that sunlight was not a luxury request but a constitutional condition tied to health and basic detention standards.

In practice, the burden for compliance falls on San Francisco jail officials and the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office, led by Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, because the order applies inside County Jail 3. The new lawsuit argues that the city has not translated the federal order into daily jail operations, leaving a gap between what the court required and what people in custody say they experience.

The dispute lands in the middle of a broader San Francisco debate over jail oversight. At County Jail No. 2 on Seventh Street, nine women filed a separate federal civil rights lawsuit in June over claims that they had no sunlight, no hot water, insect infestations, and fewer job opportunities than men. ABC7 reported that the complaint also alleged artificial light 24 hours a day and health problems including skin issues, sleep disorders, headaches, and impaired eyesight. City Attorney David Chiu said the city would review that complaint and respond in court once served.

That case followed a January 21, 2026 SF.gov report with joint recommendations after a Dec. 8, 2025, multi-agency tour and roundtable on County Jail No. 2. Advocates have also called for an investigation after allegations that women were strip-searched in front of male deputies and recorded on body-worn cameras. Together, the complaints point to a deeper accountability problem: San Francisco has had court orders, complaints, and official reviews, but inmates and their lawyers say the conditions inside the jails still tell a different story.