Tag: Jonathan Skrmetti

Categories
News News Blog News Feature Uncategorized

Trump Cleared for Tennessee Ballot; AG’s Office Declines Opinion Request

Jonathan Skrmetti (Photo: tncourts.gov)

Donald Trump can appear on Tennessee election ballots in November after the Tennessee Attorney General refused to issue an opinion on the matter last week. 

Rep. Vincent Dixie (D-Nashville) requested the opinion from Tennessee AG Jonathan Skrmetti, a Republican, earlier this month. Dixie pointed to a Tennessee law that says anyone convicted of an “infamous crime” is “disqualified from qualifying for, seeking election to or holding a public office in this state.” 

Dixie said the law is meant “to protect the public from individuals who refuse to adhere to the laws they are meant to uphold.” He then pointed to Trump’s convictions on 34 felony counts of election interference last week.  

Skrmetti’s office said it could only render opinions to officials “in the discharge of their official duties.” The letter added emphasis to the words “in the discharge of their official duties” but did not offer further details. 

Dixie-Ltr.-6.6.24Download

“Your letter also rests on an incorrect premise that (the state law’s) reference to ‘a public office in this state’ somehow includes the U.S. President,” reads the letter from Tennessee solicitor General Matt Rice. “The U.S. Presidency is not a public office in Tennessee. And any State effort to add new qualifications for the U.S. President would raise serious constitutional questions.” 

Dixie said he was “disappointed” but “not surprised” by the response from the AG’s office. 

“This just highlights the broken criminal justice system in this country,” Dixie said in a statement. “There is no rational explanation for a way that a person can possibly be elected [President of the United States] by this state, and if that same person lived in Tennessee, they wouldn’t even be able to cast a ballot and vote. How does that make sense?”

Dixie’s request came after Trump was convicted in New York last month on 34 felony counts. Trump was convicted of all counts as part of a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election by falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments to a porn star who alleged she had sex with him.

Secretary of State Tre Hargett’s office told Tennessee Lookout earlier this month that Trump will be on Tennessee’s election ballot.  

Stockard on the Stump: Secretary of State guarantees Trump will be on Tennessee ballot
Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Judge Halts New Trans Protections In Tennessee Schools

(Credit: Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash)

A federal judge will temporarily allow some transgender discrimination in Tennessee and other states, skirting new changes to Title IX. 

Those changes came in President Joe Biden’s first day in office with an executive order that added gender identity and sexual orientation to the anti-discrimination law. Biden later extended those protections to educational environments. The rules are set to go into effect on August 1. All of these changes came after the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that prohibited companies from firing a person on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. 

In April, Tennessee led a coalition in a lawsuit to block Biden’s new additions to Title IX. The group included Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, Virginia, Christian Educators Association International (CEAI), and “A.C.”, a 15-year-old high school girl who lives in West Virginia. 

The states argued that the new law would chill free speech and religious freedom because teachers would, under the new rules, have to use a student’s “preferred pronouns,” according to the suit. The law would also mandate schools to open up bathrooms and locker rooms to all genders. The states also argued that the new rules subverted Congressional review and overreached into states’ powers to make such laws. 

CEAI opposed the rules on grounds of free speech and shared private facilities. Its members — particularly educators in K-12 public schools —  wish to “live and work consistent with their shared belief that God created human beings as male and female and that sex is an immutable trait.” 

A.C., the 15-year-old student, said a transgender female was allowed to compete on her middle-school track team. The other student’s biology is an unfair advantage, A.C. said, and she did not feel comfortable dressing in front of the other student.

A federal judge agreed with the plaintiffs in a Tuesday ruling.

“There are two sexes: male and female,” wrote Chief Judge Danny Reeves, United States District Court of Eastern Kentucky. But Reeves said in a footnote that the statement was conceded by U.S. Department of Education officials in oral arguments. “The parties have agreed to little else.”

Reeves ordered a preliminary injunction against the new rules but only in those states who joined in the lawsuit. The stay extends to the Christian educators group and A.C. in those six states. 

Tennessee schools and universities would have to let boys into girls’ locker rooms and other private spaces.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti

“If the rule we stopped had been allowed to go into effect on August 1 as scheduled, Tennessee schools and universities would have to let boys into girls’ locker rooms and other private spaces,” Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in a statement. “If the rule went into effect, our schools would have to punish teachers and students who declined to use someone’s preferred pronouns.

“These are profound changes to the law that the American people never agreed to.  This rule was a huge overreach by federal bureaucrats, and the court was right to stop it.”

Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project, said, “We have a state government going into battle against trans and non-binary students via their pronouns,” in an opinion piece in The Tennessean Monday. 

Government employees should not have more of a right to define a student’s identity than the student does.

Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project

“Students are better served by policies that respect their identities,” Sanders said. “They are at school to get an education without barriers, not to serve as an opportunity for adults to exercise virtue by choice. 

“Experiencing an agent of the state using the wrong pronoun in front of one’s peers day after day is something students should not endure. Government employees should not have more of a right to define a student’s identity than the student does.”

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

Sen. Taylor Reveals Plan for Ousting DA Mulroy

Brent Taylor exiting the SCEC (Credit: Jackson Baker)

State Senator Brent Taylor confided to the Memphis Flyer on Sunday the basic outlines of the procedure he intends to set in motion to remove Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy  from office. 

The plan, as the senator indicated,  will depend on legislative action in a coming session of the General Assembly, either a regular session or a specially called one. 

Taylor, a persistent  critic of Mulroy for what the senator considers laxity in local law enforcement, says his plan is based on Article VI, Section 6, of the state constitution and would call for a removal  resolution to be passed by both chambers of the legislature, to be followed by gubernatorial action to appoint a successor as Shelby  DA.

State House Speaker Cameron Sexton has also acknowledged discussing the idea of ousting Mulroy with state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. Taylor promised to elaborate on details of his thinking and Sexton’s at a press conference at 2 p.m. Monday at the headquarters of the Memphis Police Association on Jefferson Avenue.

Both Taylor and Sexton fired off condemnations last week of Mulroy’s announcement of a diversionary program for non-violent previous offenders charged with illegal possession of firearms.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

State Lawmaker Seeks AG Opinion on Trump on Tennessee Ballot

Nashville state representative Vincent Dixie. Credit: State of Tennessee

A state lawmaker requested a legal opinion from Tennessee’s Attorney General last week on whether or not Donald Trump qualifies to appear on Tennessee’s presidential ballot, following his convictions in New York. 

Rep. Vincent Dixie (D-Nashville) requested the opinion from Tennessee AG Jonathan Skrmetti, a Republican, in a letter sent Friday. In it, Dixie pointed to a Tennessee law that says anyone convicted of an “infamous crime” is “disqualified from qualifying for, seeking election to or holding a public office in this state.” 

Dixie said the law is meant “to protect the public from individuals who refuse to adhere to the laws they are meant to uphold.” He then pointed to Trump’s convictions on 34 felony counts of election interference last week.  

“It is crucial for Tennesseans to trust that their elected officials are held to the highest standards of legality and ethics,” Dixie said in his letter. “Allowing a candidate with such convictions to appear on the ballot would undermine this trust and the rule of law.” 

The law is meant ”to protect the public from individuals who refuse to adhere to the laws they are meant to uphold.”

Rep. Vincent Dixie

He continued, “The public’s interest in maintaining integrity in our electoral process necessitates that individuals convicted of serious crimes be held accountable and disqualified from holding public office.”

Dixie said the convictions “reflect serious criminal offenses,” including falsification of business records, “a crime prosecuted vigorously in both New York and Tennessee.”

“Given the severity and nature of these crimes, which include lying in official filings and engaging in deceitful practices to influence the outcome of an election, I seek your legal interpretation on whether Donald Trump’s convictions in New York constitute an ‘infamous crime’ under Tennessee law,” he said. “Specifically, does this disqualify him from appearing on Tennessee’s ballot for the U.S. presidential election?”

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

TN AG Fights Feds on Pronouns in Workplace

Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti led a coalition of 17 states in filing a lawsuit against the federal government over new rules that would mandate pronoun respect in the workplace. 

In September, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) voted to approve updates to its workplace harassment rules. The new rules reflect changes in such laws, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to protect employees against discrimination because of sexuality or gender identity (Bostock v. Clayton County), the #MeToo movement, and emerging issues such as virtual or online harassment.

The rules were published and given a period for public comment, and became federal law in late April. 

“Harassment, both in-person and online, remains a serious issue in America’s workplaces,” EEOC chair Charlotte A. Burrows said in a statement at the time. “The EEOC’s updated guidance on harassment is a comprehensive resource that brings together best practices for preventing and remedying harassment and clarifies recent developments in the law.”

The EEOC said between fiscal years 2016 and 2023, more than a third of all discrimination charges received by the agency included an allegation of harassment based on race, sex, disability, or another characteristic covered by the laws enforced by the agency. Also, since fiscal year 2018, harassment has been alleged in over half of federal sector equal employment opportunity complaints. Among the 143 merits lawsuits that the commission filed last year, about 35 percent of them included an allegation of harassment.

However, Tennessee AG Skrmetti said companies should be able to use whatever pronoun they choose to use for their employees. As he has done in several such lawsuits in the past, Skrmetti claims the federal government is overreaching into powers given to states.

“In America, the Constitution gives the power to make laws to the people’s elected representatives, not to unaccountable commissioners, and this EEOC guidance is an attack on our constitutional separation of powers,” Skrmetti said in a statement. “When, as here, a federal agency engages in government over the people instead of government by the people, it undermines the legitimacy of our laws and alienates Americans from our legal system.  

“This end-run around our constitutional institutions misuses federal power to eliminate women’s private spaces and punish the use of biologically-accurate pronouns, all at the expense of Tennessee employers.”

Skrmetti also complained about EEOC’s new rule that would make an employer liable if it limits access to a bathroom or other sex-segregated facility, such as a shower or locker room, based on biological sex and not on gender identity, the AG said. Skrmetti claimed employers also may be liable if a customer or other non-employee fails to use an employee’s preferred pronouns or refuses to share a restroom with someone of the opposite sex.

Tennessee is joined the lawsuit with attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia. 

More broadly, the EEOC’s new rules protect an array of what the agency calls ”legally protected characteristics,” including race, skin color, religion, disability, age, and more. Workplace harassment includes saying or writing an ethnic, racial, or sex-based slur, forwarding an offensive or derogatory “joke” email, mocking a person’s accent, groping, touching, or otherwise physically assaulting a person, and more. 

If a harassment claim is filed, business owners should investigate the matter and take corrective action, EEOC said. That action can include firing the employee, but it isn’t required. The employer can also mandate informal counseling, give a written warning, mandate harassment training, suspend the employee without pay, reassign them, or demote them to a non-supervisory position.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

TN AG: State Constitution Allows Tickets to Legislative Session

State Capitol (Credit: Tennessee State Government)

A ticketing system that restricts public access to the Tennessee House of Representatives is allowable under the state’s constitution, according to a legal opinion from Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.

House Speaker Cameron Sexton surprised lawmakers and members of the public last month by introducing the new policy, which allocates one ticket for every lawmaker to give to the public during each House session.

In practice, the ticketing system has meant that Tennessee’s super-majority GOP House can control its audience while conducting public business.  GOP lawmakers get 75 tickets and Democrats 24, all for the west balcony overlooking the House floor. The east side of the gallery remains open to the media and public.

Sexton has defended the policy against criticism, saying representatives want to ensure visitors they know are arriving have seats, even if they are a few minutes late. He said lawmakers could also share tickets and noted that Congress also has a ticketing system.

Establishing a ticketing system falls within the authority of the General Assembly to regulate and manage access to the Capitol building, the legal opinion, issued last week, said.

According to the opinion, “the Tennessee Constitution contemplates that sessions during which the General Assembly conducts its business will be open to the public, but it does not guarantee the public a right of access to legislative sessions,” it said.

The Tennessee Constitutions says that “doors of each House and of committees of the whole shall be kept open, unless when the business shall be such as ought to be kept secret.”

The ticketing system, the opinion said, “would not run afoul of the “open door” provision of (the Tennessee Constitution) because it would not close the doors to the public; it would merely manage public access to the limited space that is available.”

Skrmetti opinion – House ticketing system

Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Taylor Still At It

Brent Taylor (Photo: Senator Brent Taylor | Facebook)

State Senator Brent Taylor, who is functioning as a sort of self-appointed scourge of Shelby County’s existing law-enforcement infrastructure, is at it again — attempting to prod state government into intervening against “the slow movement of cases” through the county’s criminal justice system.

“Crime in Memphis has risen to a level that requires immediate action to save the city,” Taylor proclaimed in a newly released letter to Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. He cites figures appearing to show that processing of criminal cases in the county dropped to a level of 40 cases last year, down from “approximately 200 per year prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Taylor’s letter poses four questions to the attorney general:

“(1) Does the Governor of Tennessee have the authority to assign judges from one or more judicial districts to other judicial districts for purposes of trying criminal cases?

“(2) Does the Governor of Tennessee have the authority to temporarily assign judges from a certain judicial district to try criminal cases in that same judicial district?

“(3) Does the Governor of Tennessee have the authority to require Shelby County Circuit Court Judges to handle criminal matters in Shelby County?

“(4) Who has the authority to require certain Shelby County Circuit Court Judges to assist with and/or try criminal cases?”

Taylor, who represents state Senate District 31, said in the letter that, if the governor is deemed to have such authority to assign judges — whether from other judicial districts or from other courts within the same district — to help process criminal cases in Shelby County, then he would request the governor do so immediately.

“By prosecuting criminal cases quickly, we will remove violent and repeat criminal offenders from the streets of Memphis so that the law-abiding can raise their families in peace and safety,” he wrote in the letter.

Taylor, who is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote, “I am determined to pursue any legal avenue available to tackle our serious violent crime problem.”

This new letter is the latest in a series of public statements in which the senator, who was elected to his first term just last year, has inquired of other state officials about the possibility of extending state power into areas that have previously been reserved for local authorities.

In previous missives to the governor, to House Speaker Cameron Sexton, and to the state board of professional responsibility, he has proposed such actions as sending the National Guard into Memphis and reducing the supervisory power of Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy.

The senator has introduced a legislative package in Nashville that, among other things, would change bail laws, require law enforcement to report undocumented immigrants, and reclassify stolen gun charges.

Another of his proposals would exempt Memphis police from having to uphold a city council prohibition against preemptive traffic stops for suspected minor infractions. At the moment, this matter has achieved hot-button status in city government.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Tennessee Attorney General Condemns New EEOC Guidelines Regarding Sexual Harassment

Jonathan Skrmetti (Photo: tncourts.gov)

Tennessee’s Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti believes that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) “Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace” is “arbitrary and capricious,” and “unconstitutional.”

On November 1st, Skrmetti, on behalf of the state of Tennessee along with 19 other state attorneys general, released comments regarding the EEOC’s new guidance, as he and others believe it would “unleash unconstitutional chaos in the nation’s workplace.”

“The EEOC has once again proposed enforcement guidance that extends beyond its statutory authority and threatens the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans,” Skrmetti said. “Tennessee has successfully challenged EEOC’s unlawful guidance in the past and stands ready to do so again.”   

Skrmetti specifically called out how the new guidelines have broadened “sex-based harassment” to include “intentional and repeated use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with the individual’s gender identity.” The new guidelines also include bathroom bans and discrimination.

“Examples include epithets regarding sexual orientation or gender identity … or the denial of access to a bathroom or other sex-segregated facility consistent with the individual’s gender identity,” the guidelines said.

In the letter, Skrmetti reminded the EEOC that the state of Tennessee was joined by other Republican state attorneys general in 2021 to bring a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education along with the commission, which “advanced a vastly expanded view of Title VII liability for the nation’s employers.”

“[EEOC] Chair [Charlotte] Burrows unilaterally issued that guidance in 2021 without opportunity for comment, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee enjoined it,” the letter said.

The letter lists a number of reasons as to why Skrmetti and others oppose the new guidelines. The text asserts that these new proposals “exceed the agency’s Title VII authority,” and that they violate the United States Constitution.

“Free-speech limits do not allow EEOC to compel employers to ‘speak its preferred message’ against their will,” the letter said. It also mentioned that employees and employers who do comply to the EEOC’s “chosen gender ideology orthodoxy” are potentially compromising their religious freedoms.

Skrmetti and others have urged the EEOC to “make appropriate changes.” They have also stated that they are prepared to pursue legal action.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

TN AG Moves to Close NAACP Suit On Voting Rights

Photo by Element5 Digital on Unsplash

A lingering legal battle that was poised to be settled this summer, leading to a clearer pathway for tens of thousands of Tennesseans to restore their voting rights, has instead reignited into a contentious court fight with no certain outcome ahead of the next presidential election.

One in five Black voting-age Tennesseans lacks the right to vote due to a past criminal conviction — likely the highest rate of African-American disenfranchisement in the nation, according to the Sentencing Project. Overall, nearly 10 percent of the Tennessee electorate — 470,000 people — have lost their right to vote due to convictions.

In a lawsuit filed in December 2020, the Tennessee Conference of the NAACP and five residents denied the right to vote alleged Tennessee officials failed to follow state laws that allow individuals to legally restore their voting rights after serving their sentences and completing parole. Instead, the state implemented inaccessible and opaque processes that impede legal pathways for restoring rights, the lawsuit claimed.

Close to settling key claims in the case over the summer — potentially ahead of high profile local elections in Nashville, Memphis, and for state office — attorneys for the state abruptly broke off talks in late July, catching lawyers for the NAACP by surprise, legal filings show. Then, on August 2nd, lawyers for the Tennessee Attorney General filed motions asking a judge to reject the claims entirely.

Tennessee Supreme Court rules in felony voting rights case

Tennessee Lookout

“The Elections Division, TDOC, and Governor’s office had the opportunity this summer to create accessible, transparent, and uniform procedures to allow the over 470,000 disenfranchised Tennesseans a fair shot at getting their voting rights restored and rejoining their communities as full citizens,” Blair Bowie, an attorney representing the NAACP with the DC-based Campaign Legal Center, said Friday.

“Instead, they blew up the voting rights restoration system entirely and imposed effectively permanent disenfranchisement on July 21st,” she said. 

A spokesperson for the Tennessee Attorney General did not respond to emailed questions on Friday. 

The breakdown in the federal case came shortly after a June 29th ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court against Ernest Falls, who was denied the right to vote in Tennessee in 2020 after receiving clemency in Virginia for a decades-old crime. 

The Supreme Court ruled that Falls, also represented by the Campaign Legal Center, was required to show he had paid all outstanding court costs, restitution and child support obligations in Virginia to establish his voting rights — in addition to proof of the Virginia clemency.

Secretary of State Mark Goins then issued a memo that incorporated expanded requirements for all state residents seeking to restore their voting rights — regardless of where their conviction took place. In addition to the process of demonstrating they, too, had paid court costs and other financial obligations related to their crime, in-state residents must now show they also “have been pardoned by a Governor, U.S. President, or other appropriate authority of a state or have had their full rights of citizenship restored as prescribed by law.”

The memo wasn’t shared with attorneys for the NAACP who had been involved with them in settlement negotiations for months, legal filings said.

“Plaintiffs learned from public reporting that Defendant Goins had that day issued guidance to county election officials changing his interpretation of the State’s requirements for individuals with felony convictions to restore their voting rights,” court records said.

In seeking a ruling dismissing major elements of the case, state lawyers have argued in motions for summary judgment that the five individuals names in the suit lack standing in court.

Tennessee does have a process in place for restoration of rights, one that provides a pathway to restoring rights while preserving election integrity, they argued.

“Tennessee does not reject all voter registration forms on which the applicant affirmed that they have a felony conviction,” the state’s filings said. “Moreover, Tennessee’s practice is rationally related to its legitimate interest in combatting voter fraud, safeguarding voter confidence, and ensuring accurate record keeping.”

The Sentencing Project’s national voting rights study found that that 3,415 Tennessee voting-age citizens have been granted Certificates of Restoration since 2016 — fewer than 1 percent of those with prior felony convictions estimated to be eligible to vote under Tennessee law.

The NAACP lawsuit argues that the current administration of voting rights restoration certificates violate the U.S. Constitution’s due process and the equal protection rights.

Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Attorneys General Want Congressional Review of AI-Created Child Pornography

Photo by Michael Dziedzic on Unsplash

A bipartisan group of District Attorneys General urged Congress to broaden its review of artificial intelligence (AI) to specifically include its use in creating deepfake images of child pornography. 

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti joined colleagues from 54 states and territories in a Tuesday letter asking federal officials to examine AI’s use in making child sexual abuse material (CSAM). The letter gave an example of how the process works.      

“AI tools can rapidly and easily create ‘deepfakes’ by studying real photographs of abused children to generate new images showing those children in sexual positions,” the letter reads. “This involves overlaying the face of one person on the body of another. Deepfakes can also be generated by overlaying photographs of otherwise unvictimized children on the internet with photographs of abused children to create new CSAM involving the previously unharmed children.” 

The group said AI can also be used to create sexualized images an videos of children who “do not exist.”

“AI can combine data from photographs of both abused and non-abused children to animate new and realistic sexualized images of children who do not exist, but who may resemble actual children,” reads the letter. “Creating these images is easier than ever, as anyone can download the AI tools to their computer and create images by simply typing in a short description of what the user wants to see. And because many of these AI tools are ’open- source,’ the tools can be run in an unrestricted and un-policed way.”

The group of attorneys general want Congress to form a special commission to specifically study how AI can be used to exploit children. They also want federal lawmakers to move to expand existing restrictions on CSAM to explicitly cover AI-generated CSAM.