Categories
News News Blog News Feature

New Blended Sentencing Law Could Send Hundreds of Youth to Adult System

The exterior of the Memphis-Shelby County Juvenile Court in downtown Memphis. Photo by Andrea Morales for MLK50

This story was originally published by MLK50: Justice Through Journalism. Subscribe to their newsletter here.

In January, a new “blended sentencing” law will go into effect in Tennessee that could usher hundreds of children into the adult criminal justice system with fewer checks than the existing adult transfer process. It will also keep those kids in the juvenile justice system longer. 

The law is “extremely harmful for youth in Memphis,” said Ala’a Alattiyat, coordinator for the Youth Justice Action Council. “It will not keep our community safer, and it will continue to perpetuate the cyclical nature of the justice system by making it harder for youth to exit that cycle.”

Children as young as 14 could be subject to blended sentencing. These children will be required to serve juvenile sentences until they turn 19. They will also face up to four years of adult prison or probation.

Initially, this adult sentence is stayed, meaning it will only take effect if certain criteria are met. Only one of these criteria concerns whether a child has committed another delinquent act.

As a result, kids could end up in adult prison without committing another crime, said Zoe Jamail, policy coordinator at Disability Rights Tennessee. Instead, the text of the law allows children to increase their risk of going to prison by breaking curfew or failing to graduate from high school. 

Ultimately, children “who would otherwise never have been facing an adult sentence” will be swept into the adult system, said Jasmine Ying Miller, a senior attorney at Youth Law Center.

Read more about how the law will work here. 

Blended sentencing is part of a broader effort by some lawmakers to make Tennessee’s juvenile justice system more punitive, even though rates of youth crime in the state have been declining for at least a decade. 

In April, the state legislature passed the “Juvenile Organized Retail Theft Act,” which allows children to be tried as adults for shoplifting or stealing a gun. In May, it passed the “Parental Accountability Act,” which allows judges to fine parents for offenses committed by their children.

Rep. John Gillespie. Photo by Andrea Morales for MLK50

The blended sentencing legislation, which also passed in May, was introduced and sponsored by several Memphis-area lawmakers. In the State Senate, the bill was sponsored by state Sen. Brent Taylor (R-Memphis). In the House, the bill was sponsored by Rep. Mark White (R-Memphis), Rep. John Gillespie (R-Memphis), and Rep. G.A. Hardaway (D-Memphis). 

“State policies related to youth justice consistently and disproportionately target Memphis, which is a predominantly Black city,” said Alattiyat. As a result, “this type of law always ends up disproportionately targeting Black youth.”

Blended sentencing’s sponsors often imply — incorrectly — that youth are responsible for most of Memphis’s crime. 

“We are living in a state of fear in Memphis, in the surrounding area,” Rep. Gillespie told colleagues during a House discussion of blended sentencing, “and it is almost entirely because of juveniles committing violent crimes that are going unpunished.”

These claims are misleading. Memphis-Shelby County Juvenile Court has said that adults are responsible for most crimes in the county. Children do seem to be disproportionately involved in car theft; about a third of those charged with vehicle-related crimes are youth offenders, according to the Memphis Police Department. Available data suggest that youth are less involved in violent crime. 

According to statistics maintained by the Memphis-Shelby County Juvenile Court, juvenile crime did increase in 2022. But by 2023, juvenile crime had fallen to the same level as 2021. Overall, juvenile crime in Memphis has been on a steady decline since at least 2011. 

Nevertheless, legislators insist that drastic action must be taken on youth crime in Memphis.

Rep. Mark White during a House committee hearing in March of this year. Photo by Andrea Morales for MLK50

“Juvenile laws traditionally have been there to protect the juvenile,” said White, who introduced the bill in the House. In his view, protection is no longer the right approach. “We’re living in a different time with some of the crimes committed by these 14, 15, 16, 17-year-olds.”

Currently, Tennessee’s juvenile justice system operates on two tracks: either children remain in the juvenile system — where they must be released by 19, no matter the offense they’ve committed — or they can be transferred to the adult system. 

White believes that the first track, in which children remain in the juvenile system until age 19, enables juvenile crime. Under the current system, children “can shoot and kill a person at 17 and go free at 19,” he said. 

Children accused of murder and attempted murder are usually transferred to adult court unless they have been abused or coerced, lawyers say.

Some juvenile judges also take issue with this part of the law; they’d like the option to keep older kids who have committed serious offenses in the juvenile system beyond 19.

“We all want a tool where we can extend jurisdiction to capture youth past the age of 19,” said Judge Aftan Strong, chief magistrate of Memphis-Shelby County’s Juvenile Court. “Extended jurisdiction” would give courts more time to rehabilitate young offenders, she said. 

Blended sentencing bears little resemblance to this policy. And while juvenile judges are legally required to rehabilitate youth offenders, the architects of blended sentencing have made it clear that rehabilitation is beside the point. 

White introduced an initial version of blended sentencing to the legislature in April 2023. The next month, White published an op-ed where he wrote, “We are well past the time of ‘we need to rehabilitate our youth.’” Instead, he wrote, the juvenile justice system should focus on “discipline, correction and punishment.” 

A view of the state legislature floor during a House session in March 2023. Photo by Andrea Morales for MLK50

In that same op-ed, White compared Memphis’ “undisciplined youth” to the 1870s yellow fever epidemic that killed or displaced 30,000 Memphians.

Ultimately, blended sentencing will likely incarcerate more children while failing to address youth crime, critics say. Empirical research on young people “does not support this viewpoint that you can punish your way into reducing crime.” said Cardell Orrin, Tennessee executive director at Stand for Children. 

White is not concerned by this critique. “We have to have a system where [young offenders] understand the seriousness of what they did and that they will be detained in the system,” White told MLK50. 

“A lot of the issues are coming from 2 percent-4 percent of our [youth] population,” he continued. “If we would just detain those people and make believers out of them, it may keep other people from reoffending.” 

Four percent of Memphis’ population between the ages of 10 and 17 is roughly 2,700 children, based on available U.S. census data. 

“We may have to go too far to one side trying to correct it in order to get back to sanity,” said White.

Rebecca Cadenhead is the youth and juvenile justice reporter for MLK50: Justice Through Journalism. She is also a corps member with Report for America, a national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms. Email her  rebecca.cadenhead@mlk50.com.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature Uncategorized

State Budget Flags On Business Tax Breaks

Tennessee’s State Funding Board approved conservative growth rates Thursday as revenue flags in the wake of a major business tax reduction.

The board, which is made up of the state’s three constitutional officers and finance commissioner, set a growth rate in general fund revenue of 1 percent to 2 percent and total tax growth at 1.25 percent to 2.15 percent for fiscal 2025-26.

With this year’s overall budget at $52.8 billion, the board maintained the total growth rate projection for fiscal 2024-25 at negative-1.68 percent to negative-1.34 percent. The board was forced to roll back projections at mid-year because of weak revenue.

Economic experts told the board earlier this month that the economy is in good shape but that growth is slowing after double-digit revenue two years ago. The state also is facing a $1.9 billion business tax reduction over several years after lawmakers approved a request by Gov. Bill Lee to eliminate the property portion of the state’s franchise and excise taxes. That came on the heels of a business tax break the previous year.

Tennessee lawmakers still at odds over business tax cut as session enters final days

The Department of Revenue has processed nearly $900 million in rebates this year, and more are expected.

Tennessee’s growth rate usually lies between 3.5 percent to 5 percent, but staff expected revenue to slow down and built in a cushion over the past two years, Budget Director David Thurman said.

In recent budget hearings, state departments and agencies requested more than $4.2 billion in funding increases for fiscal 2025-26 to deal with inflation and improvements in state services. But the revenue forecast isn’t expected to come close to matching that figure, even with federal funds covering some of the costs.

The weak budget outlook could affect lawmakers’ decisions on providing funds to flood-ravage counties in East Tennessee and the governor’s proposed private-school voucher program, which was not approved this year but has $144 million in unused funds in the budget.

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 X.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Hemp Flower Set to Disappear from Stores Next Month

Hemp flower is still set to disappear from store shelves on December 26th after state lawmakers left a new rule in place this week, one that cannabis industry leaders say could decimate their businesses.

Cannabis farmers and retailers already adhere to a state law that limits products to a maximum of .3 percent THC. The new rule, set not by lawmakers but the Tennessee Department of Agriculture (TDOA), includes new testing for THCA levels, which can rise in products on store shelves or after purchase by being heated. 

The new rule would stop the sale of smokeable hemp flower, those recognizable green nuggets that can be crushed, rolled in a joint, or lit in the bowl of a bong. Pushback on the sale of hemp flowers comes largely from GOP members of the Tennessee General Assembly. Their objection being, basically, that smoking dry flower can get users high from legal products.

 On his way to Wednesday’s joint House and Senate hearing on the TDOA’s new cannabis rules, Soddy Daisy cannabis farmer and Farm to Med retail owner Chris Sumrell, said he passed two groups of people smoking cannabis. Public consumption is a problem, he said, even noting that if “someone that looked like me [with long hair and a beard]” was smoking cannabis next to his family in a park, he’d move away from them. But lawmakers should not take the product away form retailers.

“What do people do with the flower? They smoke it,” Sumrell testified. “We can’t stop them from doing that. If we take this off the counter, and don’t regulate it, and tax it, they’re gonna go to the black market or take their business across state lines.” 

Sumrell’s testimony on his cannabis use was one of the clearest public delineations between smokeable products and edibles given to state lawmakers in years of debate. The new rules would test products at or after the moment of decarboxylation. This process, usually done with heat, converts THCA into THC, releases psychoactive compounds, and gets users high. 

Here’s how Sumrell described the nitty-gritty: 

”Anybody that uses cannabis will tell you that eating cannabis and smoking cannabis are two completely different things. I don’t eat it at all. I don’t like it because that’s the Delta 9. That’s the psychoactive narcotic. The walls can melt if you take on too much of that stuff, okay? 

“But smoking it, it’s a different property altogether. That’s combustion, not decarboxylation. 

“So, that’s where the wall is very confusing because say we’re talking about decarboxylation to somebody that’s a scientist. They’re gonna say, ‘well, they’re talking about cooking with it.’ No, they’re talking about using this to take the [hemp flower] off of the table. Well, that’s combusting it. That’s a different chemical process. This is science. 

“THCA flower does not turn into a psychoactive narcotic until you cook with it through decarboxylation. Decarboxylation’s prime temperature is 200 to 250 degrees, but starts at 98 degrees. So, just leaving that flower in the window can turn it to Delta 9. But if I’m striking a lighter to it, that’s combusting it into a [non-psychoactive] CBN and not a Delta 9.”

House Speaker Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) sponsored the overarching cannabis regulation bill two years ago. He worked closely with farmers, retailers, and government officials in drafting the bill. The bill put cannabis products behind many store shelves, and issued labeling requirements and THC limits. It also gave control of the state’s cannabis program to the TDOA, which added the rule that would ban THCA flower. 

On Wednesday, Lamberth pushed to keep the department’s rule in place for now so businesses could still operate. But he said he anticipated legislation on the matter in next year’s legislative session, which, perhaps, left the door open to smokeable products in the future. 

Jeff Sullivan, a former Memphian, and now vice president of sales with Chattanooga-based Snapdragon Hemp, pushed the debate from science, intoxication, and governance to straight economics. 

“Chris [Sumrell] will lose his farm,” Sullivan said. “Chris will lose his retail industry along with many, many other companies in Tennessee if their particular rules stay in place. It eliminates that much of their total business, their bottom line.”

Categories
News News Blog News Feature Uncategorized

School Vouchers Are Back, With GOP Leaders On the Same Page

Seven months after Gov. Bill Lee’s first universal school voucher bill died over disagreements within the legislature’s Republican supermajority, GOP leaders were unified as they introduced new legislation Wednesday.

House and Senate majority leaders William Lamberth and Jack Johnson filed identical bills to create Education Freedom Scholarships giving $7,075 each in public funding for a private education for up to 20,000 students, beginning next fall.

Recipients in grades 3-11 would be required to take a national or state standardized achievement test to track the program’s effectiveness.

In an effort to garner support among public school advocates, the proposal calls for giving every public school teacher in Tennessee a one-time $2,000 bonus. It also would direct 80 percent of tax revenues from Tennessee’s new sports betting industry toward local school building costs, especially for emergency needs and for 38 rural counties designated as distressed or at risk.

In a statement, the governor said he looks forward to delivering on his promise for more education choices for parents.

“For more than a year, I have worked in partnership with the General Assembly to introduce a unified school choice plan that empowers parents when it comes to their child’s education and further invests in Tennessee’s public schools and teachers,” Lee said.

Both Lt. Gov. Randy McNally and House Speaker Cameron Sexton issued statements of support.

The bills were the first legislation introduced for the next General Assembly to consider when it convenes Jan. 14, signaling the governor’s intention to make the issue his top legislative priority for a second straight year.

The proposal arrived one day after pivotal elections in which vouchers were an issue in numerous legislative races across Tennessee, and on the ballot in other states. Republicans retained their grip on both of Tennessee’s legislative chambers, while voters in Colorado, Kentucky, and Nebraska rejected measures that would have steered public dollars toward private schools.

Lee is expected to speak with reporters later Wednesday about his latest plan, including whether he intends to call a special session in January to focus on it exclusively.

The governor successfully pushed for a 2019 law to create a smaller voucher program in Nashville and Memphis, which has since expanded to Chattanooga. The state comptroller’s first report on that “pilot” program’s effectiveness is due Jan. 1, 2026.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Lawmakers Revisit West Tennessee Wetlands Development

Tennessee lawmakers are revisiting plans to roll back state regulations that protect nearly half a million acres of Tennessee wetlands from development.

For months, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation has elicited feedback from developers and conservation groups, at odds over state wetland policy, in order to achieve consensus.

Thursday’s meeting of the Senate Energy, Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee demonstrated how little agreement has been achieved thus far.

Allowing unchecked development on Tennessee’s wetlands — which serve to absorb floodwaters and replenish aquifers — could lead to flooding that will cost taxpayers “millions and millions of dollars down the road,” David Salyers, commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), told lawmakers.

“There’s about seven million Tennesseans that hope we get this right,” Salyers said “There are future generations that depend on us to get this right.”

Developers, seeking to gain from building boom tied to Ford plant, push for weaker wetland rules

Salyer’s agency has proposed doubling the area of wetlands that can be developed without a state permit from a quarter-acre to half an acre. The agency has also proposed reducing costly payments from developers tied to the area of wetlands they propose to disturb. And it has proposed streamlining red tape.

TDEC’s recommendations followed the efforts earlier this year by Collierville Republican Kevin Vaughan, to significantly roll back wetland protections. Vaughan’s bill ultimately failed, but could be revived when the legislature reconvenes in January.

Developers who testified Thursday criticized TDEC recommendations for not going far enough to remove onerous hurdles that drive up project timelines and increase costs.

“We’re not looking at a broad redo of wetlands across the state…we’re not looking to damage the hunting lands that are out there. We’re not looking to create floods,” said Keith Grant, a West Tennessee developer, who noted that Tennessee currently has stricter protections over small and isolated wetlands than 24 states and the federal government.

Connecting the dots between Tenn.’s home builders and bill to deregulate construction on wetlands 

“Why would Tennessee be more stringent in regulating wetlands than our federal government when regulation lowers property owners values and increases housing costs for tax paying citizens of Tennessee?” he said.

Conservationists, however, noted the increase in frequency of drought and flooding Tennessee has experienced in recent years, making the natural safeguards that wetlands provide even more vital.

“This is not the right time to turbocharge the hardening of our landscapes, but if we remove our wetlands protections that is exactly what will happen,” said George Nolan, director of the Tennessee office of the Southern Environmental Law Center.

There is no action expected on state wetlands policy until the Legislature reconvenes in January.

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 X.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Expert on TN States’ Rights Panel: “FEMA Is Unconstitutional”

Subverting the federal government was on the minds of state lawmakers Thursday in an hours-long civics lesson from far-right speakers. 

As promised in the 2023 session of the Tennessee General Assembly, the idea of nullification was heard during a summer study session in Nashville. The idea is, basically, for Tennessee to be able to nullify rules from the federal government that it does not like. 

(Read our cover story — “Who’s Got the Power?” — from March to get more details on Tennessee, state sovereignty, and nullification.)

Bills to outline a nullification process in Tennessee go back to at least to 1995. A similar resolution passed in 2021 but it was specific to Covid. It condemned the federal government for mandating vaccinations, restrictions, or requirements. 

Another came last year when state Rep. Bud Hulsey (R-Kingsport) and state Sen. Janice Bowling (R-Tullahoma) filed the ”Restoring State Sovereignty Through Nullification Act.” 

In it, the legislature could decide what federal rules they wanted to follow or not. Also, if a voter scraped together 2,000 signatures, they could submit a petition for a nullification to the Speaker of the Tennessee House.  

The bill gained very little traction, if any at all. Neither bill even got enough support to place it on the calendar for a full committee hearing. The idea was slated for a summer study review in 2023. However, that study was interrupted with a special session on school safety, in the wake of the Covenant School shooting that left six dead.  

But Bulsey and Bowling’s idea did finally get that summer study review, even if it was actually in the fall of 2024. True to form on these sessions, Thursday’s hearing yielded no votes or promise of any course of action. It was purely for review. 

The session was not a town hall. State Sen. Richard Briggs (R-Knoxville), the committee chairman, said he knew the idea was “controversial” but did not allow members of the public to speak, or clap, or boo. That right to speak came only for the experts called upon by the legislature. Those selected for this duty Thursday were roundly (and soundly) conservative. 

Jeff Cobble is an attorney and member of the conservative Federalist Society. Joe Wolverton is the inaugural constitutional law scholar for the ultra-conservative John Birch Society. Mark Pulliam is an attorney and writer who, in an August blog post, prayed “… a single juror would vote for President Trump’s acquittal in the circus-like show trial …” in Manhattan. 

The hours of their testimony ranged back to the Declaration of Independence, through the 1781 Articles of Confederation, and to 1787 when the U.S. Constitution was proposed. Lots of it dove deep into definitions of the words of the constitution, like “all,” for example. 

“I’m going to take you like elementary school students through this so this is plain,” said Wolverton in a detailed section of the Constitution to elected lawmakers. “We’re going to go through it phrase by phrase.”  

As for the meat of the separation of powers (and therefore what power Tennessee really does have in nullification), Wolverton presented his ideas wrapped like a click-bait-y YouTube video. “In an hour,” he began, “I can show you how the 14th Amendment is taught wrong.”  

“State — capitalized — has a specific meaning,” he said. “It’s got to do with the sovereign. Nations today are nation states. They are sovereign. 

“I’m suggesting to you something radical, something I did not learn in [constitutional] law. The states are sovereign over the federal government. Now, take that and chew on it. That’s what this bill’s about.” 

Some spice in the meeting came late as state Sen. Jeff Yarbro (D-Nashville) began asking questions of the panel. He asked if the work of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) helping out now in East Tennessee was an example of what they were taking about.

Yes, Cobble said, “It’s usurpation, whether it’s used for good or bad,” adding that communities come together in times of tragedy, noting specifically that “the Amish, they build their own barns. They raise their owns houses.”

“You know, good things can happen without a government,” he said. “So, my answer is yes, FEMA is clearly unconstitutional.”

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Judge Allows TN Trans Bathroom Law to Stand

A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge to Tennessee’s so-called “bathroom law,” leaving in place rules that require public schools to bar transgender students from the gendered bathrooms and locker rooms of their choice.

The decision by U.S. District Judge William Campbell keeps in effect the “Tennessee Accommodations for All Children Act,” signed into law by Gov. Bill Lee in 2021.

The law requires schools to offer “reasonable accommodation” to transgender students and school staff, but specifically excludes access to a multi-use restrooms or changing facilities.

It says students and staff must make formal requests for accommodation, such as to use a standalone restroom, and a principal must approve or deny the request in writing. And it gives parents and teachers the right to sue a school district for monetary damages if transgender students use a restroom or locker room that doesn’t conform with their gender at birth.

Critics have said the law discriminates against transgender kids and school employees, and forces individuals to out themselves to their peers.

The Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ advocacy organization that served as legal counsel in the lawsuit, has not announced whether it plans to appeal the ruling, a spokesperson said Thursday.

Judge refuses to dismiss all claims by transgender child against state, Williamson County Schools

Eli Givens, a college sophomore and LGBTQ advocate with the Tennessee Equality Project, who is unconnected to the case, called the ruling “heart wrenching” and “terrifying” for trans kids and their parents.

“I had to miss out on classes frequently because I had to go to a bathroom on the other side of school,” said Givens, who came out as trans at age 11. “What do you do in a bathroom? You go in, use the restroom, wash your hands, and you leave.”

Parents of a third grade transgender student in Williamson County Schools first filed the legal challenge in 2022, arguing the law violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded programs.

Their child, who had been living as a girl since age six, was denied access to multi-occupancy restrooms and directed to a separate and unsanitary standalone restroom at a distance from her classroom.

The insistence that she use a separate restroom “isolates her and distinguishes her from her classmates and exacerbates the stress and anxiety she experiences while trying to fit in and avoid being stigmatized on the basis of her sex and gender identity,” the lawsuit said.

Campbell had previously shot down efforts by attorneys for Williamson County Schools and state education department to dismiss the lawsuit.

In his subsequent decision, issued September 4th, Campbell noted the legal landscape that has shifted since then.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in separate decisions, has upheld two Tennessee laws aimed at transgender children and adults, including the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, he noted. The appeals court concluded gender identity is not recognized as a protected class. Under that standard set by the appeals court, Campbell said the lawsuit required a different analysis.

“Although Plaintiff identifies as a girl, the act prohibits her from using the facilities that correspond to her gender identity, while students who identify with their biological sex at birth are permitted to use such facilities,” Campbell wrote.

“However, the act and policy do not prefer one sex over the other, bestow benefits or burdens based on sex, or apply one rule for males and another for females,” the decision said.

Federal education officials have separately taken the position that Title IX protects transgender students access to facilities that conform with their gender identity.

In a separate and ongoing legal fight, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti is leading a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education over its position.

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 X.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Project Would Replace Racist Statue at Capitol with David Crockett

The statue of a historic West Tennessean is planned to rise at the Tennessee State Capitol where the statue of another historic but controversial West Tennessean recently fell. 

State lawmakers agreed to erect a statue of David Crockett on the capitol grounds in 2021. Public efforts to do this go back as early as 2012. The idea caught on but was tabled by the legislature in the 2020 session.   

Since the approval of the legislation in 2021, the process has moved along slowly and quietly. The State Building Commission approved the project during its meeting earlier this month. Even that vote was wrapped in a procedure that needed no debate, only the approval of the commission’s staff, which it had. That vote, however, only allowed for the commission of an artist to design, fabricate, and install the monument.

Legislation in 2012 created the David Crockett Commission. That board’s job was to find the ways and means necessary to create a statue of Crockett on the capitol grounds. Commission members were not to be paid nor reimbursed for travel. 

The group was also supposed to find private backers. The law reads, “No state funds shall [be] expended for such project.” That changed with the 2021 bill. Taxpayers will now foot the $1 million bill for the Crockett statue.

Another notable difference between the commission law and the new law is the location of the statue. Back in 2012, lawmakers just wanted it on the grounds of the capitol. But that changed in 2018, lawmakers had a more specific site for the statue: the pedestal above the Motlow Tunnel on Charlotte Avenue on the south steps of the Capitol Building. 

There was only one problem. When that legislation was introduced, another statue already sat at the location — the statue of racist, segregationist newspaper editor and politician Edward Carmack. The 2018 bill detailed the fact the Crockett statue was to be “in lieu of the Senator Edward Carmack statue” — that is, removing it and replacing it.

In his 1800s attire, curly, windswept hair and broad mustache, many who wandered by Carmack’s statue wondered aloud, “Why is there a statue of Mark Twain at the Tennessee capitol?” 

But Carmack could not have been more different from Twain. For example, Carmack, as editor of the Memphis Commercial newspaper at the time, incited a mob against anti-lynching activist, journalist, editor, and business woman Ida B. Wells. The mob destroyed her newspaper office. She was away and stayed away, all according to the Tennessee State Museum. 

Carmack was shot and killed by political rivals in Nashville, near where his statue was erected in 1927. It was installed, however, by a prohibition group (Carmack was also a staunch prohibitionist) that thought his big-profile death could further their cause. 

With this, the GOP-led legislature must have faced a quandary in 2020 and 2021. How could they remove a huge historical marker from the capitol as they were fighting to keep so many others (like a bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest)? 

History, it seems, took care of that. Protestors tore down Carmack’s statue in 2020 during the turmoil following the police killing of George Floyd. 

Photo: Natalie Allison

State officials said at the time the statue had been removed to another location. State law said it had to be replaced. But it’s unclear if it ever was. 

But the suggestion that the statue had to be replaced by state law drew the (10-tweet) ire of pop star Taylor Swift. 

Photo: Taylor Swift via X

“FYI, [Carmack] was a white supremacist newspaper editor who published pro-lynching editorials and incited the arson of the office of Ida B. Wells (who actually deserves a hero’s statue for her pioneering work in journalism and civil rights),” Swift tweeted at the time. “Replacing his statue is a waste of state funds and a waste of an opportunity to do the right thing.”

One of the 2021 bill’s sponsor, Sen. Steve Southerland (R-Morristown), even told The Chattanooga Times Free Press at the time, he “didn’t think it would be possible to remove Carmack.”

The newspaper story said, Southerland “then smiled and then added: ‘Someone removed it for us, so they did us a favor.’”

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Under Tennessee’s Stricter School Library Law, Some Books Quietly Disappear

Jennifer Edwards was a teenager in Arizona when she first read “Beloved,” Toni Morrison’s haunting novel about sexual violence and the brutal realities of American slavery.

“It had a profound effect on me,” she said, citing the empathy, historical understanding, and critical thinking skills the book imparted.

Now a mother of two sons and living in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, Edwards wants teens in her community to have access to her all-time favorite book.

But under a recently revised state law broadening the definition of what school library materials are prohibited, her local board of education is set to vote Thursday on whether to pull the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel and six other books with mature themes from the shelves of Rutherford County Schools.

“Banning books is not OK,” Edwards told the board last month as it began reviewing the materials. “Just because you don’t like what the mirror shows you doesn’t mean you put the mirror down.”

This week’s vote comes after the district, south of Nashville, already removed 29 books from its libraries this year under a previous policy, part of a wave of purges on campuses across Tennessee and other states.

In Tennessee, that wave started under Gov. Bill Lee’s 2022 school library law requiring periodic reviews of catalogs to ensure materials are appropriate for the ages and maturity levels of the students who can access them. Librarians and teachers had to publish their inventories of book collections online for parents to view. Early removals included books about marginalized groups, including people who identify as LGBTQ+, and descriptions of slavery and racial discrimination throughout U.S. history.

This spring, scrutiny escalated. Republican lawmakers added a definition of what’s “suitable” and, based on the state’s obscenity law, prohibited any material that “in whole or in part contains descriptions or depictions of sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse.”

In the absence of state guidance on how to interpret the changes — What constitutes excess violence, for instance? Are photographs of nude statues allowed? What about Shakespeare’s “Romeo & Juliet”? — some school boards like Rutherford County’s are putting questionable material to a vote. Educators in many other districts are quietly culling their shelves of certain books.

A recent survey of members of the Tennessee Association of School Librarians found that more than 1,100 titles have been removed under the changes, with more under review. One librarian anonymously reported pulling 300 titles at a single school since the start of the academic year. Only a sixth of the organization’s members responded to the survey.

“We may never truly know the level to which books have been removed from school libraries in Tennessee,” the organization said in a statement, noting that large-scale removals may cause some libraries to fall under the state’s minimum standards for collection counts.

“A literal interpretation of this law may have the unintended consequences of gutting resources that support curriculum standards for fine arts, biology, health, history, and world religions, to name a few, especially in high schools, where AP curriculum and dual enrollment courses require more critical texts,” the group said.

Lindsey Kimery, one of the organization’s leaders, said the law’s rollout has created “chaos and confusion” for school librarians.

“Some librarians have received guidance from their central office; some have not,” she said. “Some boards are updating their policies for handling book challenges to align with the law’s changes. Some districts have interpreted the law to mean they should preemptively go through their collections and pull anything they think has one of the prohibited topics in it.

“It’s all over the map,” Kimery added.

‘Phantom book banning’: Censorship in the shadows

The quiet censorship is being noticed by First Amendment advocates, from the ACLU of Tennessee to Julia Garnett, who graduated last spring from Hendersonville High School in Sumner County, north of Nashville.

Garnett started a free speech club at her high school during her senior year. Now a freshman at Smith College in Massachusetts, she is the youth spokesperson for the American Library Association’s Banned Books Week, Sept. 22-28.

Last week, she searched her alma mater’s online library catalog to look for books by Sarah J. Maas and Ellen Hopkins, whose popular young adult novels are frequently challenged or banned due to their mature themes and sexual content.

None were listed.

“They used to be there, but they’ve disappeared,” said Garnett. “I call it phantom book banning, where libraries are being censored, but not in a public way. I think that’s what scares me the most.”

The law is vulnerable to a federal challenge on First Amendment grounds, said Kathy Sinback, executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee. The statute’s vagueness, a lack of compliance guidance from the state, and the uneven way the law is being applied across Tennessee are among issues that open the door to a lawsuit.

“But we’d love to see the legislature fix the problems next year without having to pursue litigation,” Sinback said. “We’d like to see it made constitutional in a way that will ensure our children have access to the literature they deserve.”

Legal precedents support students’ First Amendment rights

The House sponsor of the law’s recent revisions, Rep. Susan Lynn of Mt. Juliet, did not respond to emails asking if she’d be open to revisiting the law. Some of her critics worry the goal is ultimately to take a legal challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court, where conservatives hold a majority.

The Senate sponsor, Joey Hensley of Hohenwald, said he believes the law is constitutional.

“I’m always open to making laws better,” he said, “but I don’t think this interferes with people’s First Amendment rights, and I’m personally not hearing about problems with it. The law’s intent is simply to ensure public schools do not give children access to materials that are not appropriate for their ages.”

Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, said higher courts have consistently sided with First Amendment advocates on challenges to content in school libraries, even as efforts to ban books in public schools and libraries reached an all-time high in 2023.

The school library is supposed to be a place of voluntary inquiry — a safe space for students to explore ideas under the supervision of adults instead of alone on their cellphones.

“This gets to the core of the First Amendment,” she said, “the idea that libraries are a marketplace of ideas, and elected officials should not be able to dictate their contents.”

But it’s also possible that another school library case could someday reach the U.S. Supreme Court. Two book ban cases from Iowa and Texas are already making their way through the federal courts.

Current legal precedent stems from the high court’s 1982 ruling involving a school board in New York state that wanted certain books removed from its middle and high school libraries. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled against the board and held that “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom.”

Justice William Brennan wrote that while “local school boards have a substantial legitimate role to play in the determination of school library content,” the First Amendment doesn’t give government officials the power to ditch books because they don’t like them or disagree with their viewpoints.

Ken Paulson, director of the Tennessee-based Free Speech Center and a former editor-in-chief of USA Today, also cites the importance of a 1969 Supreme Court ruling establishing that students have constitutional rights, too.

The case involved students in Des Moines, Iowa, who wore black armbands to their public school in silent protest of the Vietnam War. The court sided with the students.

“Because someone is 12 or 14, we sometimes think they don’t have constitutional rights,” Paulson said. “But they do, and they’re surprisingly robust. Students are not just students; they are citizens.”

Middle Tennessee district is a book ban hotspot

In Murfreesboro, a college town that is home to about 50,000 students in Tennessee’s largest suburban K-12 district, most titles removed so far were in high school libraries. They generally were contemporary young adult novels containing sexual content and other mature themes, from child abuse and suicide to substance abuse and LGBTQ+ issues.

The books were flagged as “sexually explicit” material by school board member Caleb Tidwell and removed this spring without going through the district’s library review committee that includes a principal, teachers, librarians, and a parent.

Xan Lasko, who recently retired as a high school librarian in Rutherford County, said the directives she received from Superintendent James Sullivan bypassed the district’s usual review process for handling complaints. Instead, Tidwell cited a provision of board policy requiring the immediate removal of sexually explicit material. Sullivan concurred, according to their email exchange obtained from the district through a public records request from Nashville TV station WSMV.

Tidwell, a Republican who was reelected to the school board in August, said he made the requests on behalf of individuals who have expressed concerns but who feared retaliation from the media and individuals in the district.

In his opinion, all of the materials in question violate both the state’s obscenity law and local board policy. Most, he said, have “education value near zero, or very low.” For those that provide historical context, other books that go into those topics — but without sexually explicit language — are available.

“It’s a very contentious topic,” said Tidwell, who has three school-age children. “But if we focus on the content, most of this stuff is pretty clear. Yes, there is some subjectiveness to it, but there’s also a line. We need to determine what the line is, and then hold it.”

Lasko, the former librarian, said that’s what librarians and educators do.

“My biggest issue is that a small number of people were making the judgment to curtail what students are able to read using a vague law,” said Lasko, who now chairs the intellectual freedom committee of the Tennessee Association of School Librarians.

“We have master’s degrees in library science. We know what we’re doing,” she said. “But a lot of times, we weren’t being consulted.”

New library policy diminishes the role of librarians

In advance of this week’s vote on Tidwell’s latest request to remove more books, the board revamped its library materials policy to add language from the revised state law. It also eliminated the 11-member review committee appointed annually by the board to consider book complaints.

Instead, materials that district leaders deem to be in violation of the state’s obscenity law are to be immediately removed from all school libraries and then reviewed for a final decision by the board.

A second avenue for removal — through complaints filed by a student, parent, or school employee — also requires a board vote after receiving recommendations from the principal and superintendent and a review by an ad hoc committee.

“Before,” said the ACLU’s Sinback, “there was a thorough process where every person on the review committee had expertise and would read the book. They’d look at the questionable content but also the overall quality of the material and how it could impact kids exposed to it in both a positive and negative way.”

Now, she said, the decision rests completely with board members.

The changes concern school librarians like Brian Seadorf, who oversees the collection at Blackman High School in Murfreesboro. He asked board members and parents to “just talk to us” if they have concerns about certain books.

“We are educators, we are parents, we are grandparents. … We are good people,” Seadorf told the board on Aug. 22.

Angela Frederick, a Rutherford County resident and school librarian in a neighboring district, added: “The titles you’re considering removing are for older students approaching adulthood. It is developmentally appropriate for teenagers to mentally wrestle with difficult topics. It is also excellent preparation for higher education. Shielding them from books like these does not prepare them for anything but ignorance.”

For Edwards, the Rutherford County parent who also spoke to the board, she’s most upset that “Beloved” is on the chopping block, even though she knows it’s a deeply sad and painful book to read. (Morrison, who died in 2019, said she was inspired to write the novel based on the true story of an enslaved woman, Margaret Garner, who killed her own daughter in 1856 to spare her from slavery.)

“I remember it took me several weeks to finish ‘Beloved’ when I was 15, because I had to put it down every few days,” recalls Edwards, now 42. “I had to have time to process what I was reading.”

“But to restrict literary genius,” she continued, “it just doesn’t make sense to me.”

Marta Aldrich is a senior correspondent and covers the statehouse for Chalkbeat Tennessee. Contact her at maldrich@chalkbeat.org.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature Uncategorized

Study: Tennessee Ranks Near the Top for Cannabis Arrests

The Last Prisoner Project

Tennessee is near the top for arresting people for cannabis and near the bottom for cannabis justice. 

Those are the conclusions from Denver-based The Last Prisoner Project (LPP). The group is “dedicated to releasing every last cannabis prisoner and helping them rebuild their lives.” It works on drug policy and criminal justice reform to “redress the harms of the federal government’s so-called ‘War on Drugs.’”

The group said 14,426 people were arrested for cannabis in Tennessee in 2022, using the latest available data. The figure gives the state an arrest rate of .2 percent per the population. Cannabis arrests comprised 39 percent of all drug arrests in the state that year. 

The Last Prisoner Project

This puts Tennessee near the top in two of these rankings. Only Texas arrested more people for cannabis that year (24,941). (But given that state’s huge population, the arrests rate was only .08 percent of its population.) Only Wisconsin had a higher arrest rate for cannabis (.22 percent). In Louisiana, 60 percent — more than half — of all drug arrests were for cannabis.   

But LPP admits that any real figure to determine exactly how many people are locked up on cannabis charges will be “an educated guess” at best. 

The Last Prisoner Project

“Unfortunately, thanks to our complex and oftentimes impenetrable hodgepodge of local, state, and federal criminal justice databases nobody — not even the federal government — is privy to that exact number,” reads a blog post from the group. 

However, the group’s figures (and Tennessee’s cannabis arrest rates) aren’t plucked form the air. LPP relied on two separate Bureau of Justice Statistics reports reviewing incarcerated populations by drug-specific offenses. That is, the report counted all those behind bars for drugs and what drugs brought them there. 

But the figure has to be low. Those reports don’t count those in local and county jails, juvenile detention facilities, and those held for pre-trial and pre-sentencing. Also, some facilities just don’t report to the feds like they should. 

“Nearly 40 percent of law enforcement agencies around the country did not submit any data in 2021 to a newly revised FBI crime statistics collection program,” according to a study from The Marshall Project. Neither New York City nor Los Angeles reported to the FBI that year, for example. 

The Last Prisoner Project

But the LPP can measure how well states help those previously incarcerated to find justice in the wake of either cannabis legalization or service of their time. 

Don’t worry. Tennessee does terrible there, too. Its June report gave Tennessee a D- after earning 3 points. (California earned 25 points for scale.) 

The Last Prisoner Project

“With no full legalization, no pardon policy, no avenues for resentencing, and extremely limited avenues for record clearance, Tennessee falls behind and offers virtually no relief for individuals impacted by past cannabis prohibition,” reads the report.     

The Last Prisoner Project

The LPP gave Tennessee two points for a law passed in 2022 that allowed for some criminal records to be expunged. However, it wasn’t written specifically for cannabis and the LPP said, “this unfortunately means that cannabis offense are not expedited nor guaranteed.” 

The state’s other point in the report came as the law does include broad eligibility for different levels of offenses. Tennessee scored points only in two of the report’s 16 categories. 

Don’t worry. Mississippi and Arkansas scored a D-, too. However, both states got an extra point over Tennessee for having some sort of legalization and/or decriminalization process. Tennessee has neither.