The crime charged requires specific facts to be found and validated to arrive at a guilty as charged conclusion based on BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.  If a reasonable doubt is possible the defendant cannot be found guilty.

That is the legal process that is required in American courts.  People's opinions of guilt or innocence without the facts are irrelevant.

The Kate Steinle death was an accidental shooting, a ricochet bullet from a defective gun; she was NOT targeted, not directly shot by a misfired gun.  The not guilty of murder was correct, while a charge of manslaughter probably might have netted him a few years in jail, or not.

Laws are not written to find people guilty by ALMOST meeting all the requirements of the crime, and being guilty requires a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.  The law does ot find people guilt because they appear guilty or they are immigrants.

The immigrant status of the shooter was IRRELEVANT!

The court case was handled poorly by the prosecutor in over-charging the shooter.  Public pressure from Tweety and others, and attacks on unrelated Sanctuary City circumstances, made the case difficult to try correctly.

The fact SF is a Sanctuary City is irrelevant.

"If the law is on your side, pound on the law.  If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts.  If neither are on your side, pound on the table." quote from Carl Sandburg. 

Tweety can pound the table all day long and he will lose the court case again and again.

Tweety has it wrong saying it was a case about Sanctuary, and he politicized an accident to make a false argument.