Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee is set to use state personnel, likely National Guard troops and highway patrol officers, to back President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to deport millions of immigrants when he takes office in January 2025.
The Republican governor issued a statement on the social media platform X last week saying, “I have asked key state agencies to begin making preparations & stand ready on Day 1 to support President Trump’s efforts to secure our Nation’s borders & keep communities safe.”
The statement marked the governor’s first confirmation that he is willing to use Tennessee personnel, which could include troops and state officers, to remove undocumented immigrants as part of a national effort by Trump to deport millions of people.
Lee sent the message on the heels of a statement from the Republican Governors Association saying it stands “united” in supporting Trump’s commitment to deal with the “illegal immigration crisis and deporting illegal immigrants who pose a threat to our communities and national security.”
Via X: “I have asked key state agencies to begin making preparations & stand ready on Day 1 to support President Trump’s efforts to secure our Nation’s borders & keep communities safe.”
A one-time mass deportation of about 11 million people who lack permanent legal status and 2.3 million more who crossed the U.S. southern border from January 2023 through April 2024 could cost an estimated $315 billion, according to the American Immigration Council.
The Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition condemned Lee’s commitment, saying such a move would hurt families and the local economy. The group said Lee and 25 Republican governors signed a letter committing to “utilize every tool” at their disposal, which would include state law enforcement and the National Guard.
The immigrant rights group said such a plan has been deemed “disastrous” by business leaders, economists, faith leaders and legal experts.
“Whether fleeing danger or seeking opportunity, immigrants enrich our state and strengthen our communities. Rounding up families is not just a moral disaster, but an economic one, crippling our businesses and agriculture and grinding production to a halt,” the coalition said in a statement. “Further, the state resources wasted on mass deportations could instead provide housing, healthcare, and education for Tennessee working families.”
Yet key Republican lawmakers are in the governor’s corner.
In a statement to the Tennessee Lookout, Lt. Gov. Randy McNally said, “The illegal immigration crisis, which has been untenable for many years, exploded under the Biden administration. The voters of our state and our nation have made it clear that they want the crisis resolved and President Trump is committed to resolving it. Activating the National Guard to secure our border and assist with deportations is entirely appropriate. I believe the legislature would and should approve such an effort.”
House Speaker Cameron Sexton told the Lookout last week governors would make decisions with the federal government but added that he supports removal of some immigrants.
“You’ve gotta get illegals who’ve committed crimes in our country out of the country,” Sexton said. “I don’t care where they are, you’ve gotta get them out. I don’t think ICE is big enough to handle all that due to the number of people who’ve come across the border who are criminals and committed crimes.”
While Sexton spoke about immigrants charged with crimes since coming to America, Trump hasn’t always differentiated between that group and other immigrants who make up a large sector of the nation’s workforce.
Trump’s pick for “border czar,” Tom Homan, has said the president-elect made it clear he would prioritize deportation for immigrants who are gang members and considered dangerous, while also saying anyone in the country illegally “shouldn’t feel comfortable.”
Although the Republican Governors Association accused President Joe Biden of failing to secure the border, a report by the Migration Policy Institute shows the Biden Administration is on track to remove nearly as many people as the Trump Administration — 1.1 million for the roughly three years from the start of fiscal 2021 through February 2024 — compared to 1.5 million deportations during Trump’s four years of 2016 to 2020.
The report says the Biden Administration also undertook 3 million migrant expulsions during the Covid pandemic era from March 2020 to May 2023 for a total of almost 4.4 million repatriations.
Since the Covid ban on migration ended, the Biden administration increased deportations and removed or returned 775,000 migrants, the most since 2010, according to the migrationpolicy.org article.
Still, Trump has touched on using federal troops to assist in deportation, and Republican governors are showing a willingness to put state troops and officers into the fray.
The immigrant rights coalition said the governor’s statement gives local law enforcement and the National Guard a “rubber stamp” to “overstep their jurisdiction and forcefully detain our neighbors,” which sets a “dangerous precedent for all Tennesseans.”
If illegal immigration is as big a problem in Tennessee as Lee now claims and we have the legal authority to do something about it, then Tennesseans should ask Gov. Lee and this Republican supermajority why the state has failed to do more.
– Rep. John Ray Clemmons, D-Nashville
The coalition’s statement adds the governor is “placing a dark stain on our state” and that it is “ready to defend our communities and protect one another.”
State Rep. John Ray Clemmons (D-Nashville) said the governor’s use of “bigoted talking points” is causing hostility toward his constituents. He encouraged the governor to visit his district in South Nashville to see the “thriving” businesses and children studying in local schools.
Clemmons acknowledged that dangerous criminals, gang members and terrorists in the country illegally should be removed. He added that the legislature approved $161 million for the Department of Homeland Security, $110 million to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and $18 million to the Military Department for related purposes.
“If illegal immigration is as big a problem in Tennessee as Lee now claims and we have the legal authority to do something about it, then Tennesseans should ask Gov. Lee and this Republican supermajority why the state has failed to do more,” Clemmons said.
Clemmons, though, said he believes the state’s jurisdiction and ability to enforce federal immigration policies could be entangled in “complex legal questions.”
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.
There’s a Mexican restaurant near me where I go for dinner every week or so. The hostess and the waitresses know me. I’m the guy who always orders the fish (or camarones) tacos, a side of queso dip, and a house margarita — and tips nicely. They even know the booth I like.
The place is usually populated with diners of all ethnicities. The background music is some kind of Ameri-Mexican blend with bright pop hooks and a beat you could dance to if you had more than one house margarita. There’s usually a soccer game on the television. It’s a clean, lively, friendly place. I can eat, look at my phone, and sip my margarita in peace.
The hostess and waitresses speak English better than most of their customers. They’re smart and engaging and easy to chat with. The busboys, not so much. Sometimes, I’ll stop one and ask for something — a fresh napkin, a straw — and they just shake their heads and smile, and go get a waitress. They don’t understand English very well, I assume. They could have crossed the border legally and are waiting for a work visa or a disposition on their application for asylum, but it’s also quite possible they are here without papers, working hard and laying low, hoping to avoid the coming storm.
From my seat, I can hear the busboys and kitchen staff chattering in a Spanish spoken so quickly and colloquially that it would baffle Duo the Lingo Owl. It makes me wonder what’s going to happen in a month or so if the new president and his minions follow through on their campaign pledge to institute “mass deportations.”
Will sheriff’s deputies, U.S. Marshals, or even the National Guard barge through the front door of my favorite little haunt at dinner time and march off with half the staff in handcuffs? Will they then sweep their way down Summer Avenue, stopping at all the Hispanic-owned businesses, demanding, “Papers, please”?
Will the same law-enforcement brigades start hitting up the construction sites around town, taking away the crews who build our homes and office buildings? Will they begin visiting the massive farming operations across the South and West that rely on millions of immigrants to harvest the nation’s crops? Will they raid the packing plants where immigrants prepare the beef, poultry, and pork for our grocery stores?
If it happens, it’s going to be another of those moments when ideology meets reality and it’s not going to be pretty. When fulfilling a campaign promise leads to a major disruption of the economy, when ensuing worker shortages lead to abrupt price increases, when oranges, tomatoes, and all our other produce lie rotting in our fields and orchards, will Trump and the GOP hard-liners blink? Will they really risk an economic meltdown to own the libs? Will the Americans who voted for this madness finally figure out how effed-up it is?
When millions of families are separated from loved ones, when there are mass camps of “illegal” humans of all ages across the country, when the real costs and the enormous cruelty of trying to deport 10 million people become obvious, will the politicians who ran on this xenophobic bullshit back down? Who knows?
Reporters around the country are already asking governors whether they will cooperate with federal deportation plans. Such cooperation might well involve authorizing state National Guard troops to help with rounding up suspects. In red states, including Tennessee, governors have mostly spouted the GOP party line when questioned, saying that they would do whatever the president asked them to do. In blue states, the opposite reaction has mostly occurred, with governors, mayors, and other regional officials saying they would not use local resources to help with mass deportation.
Look, if Republicans really wanted to fix immigration, they would start at the top and start prosecuting employers who hire undocumented laborers. Problem solved. But that’s never going to happen. Employers are the wrong color and they have money to grease political palms. And since the polarization game plan just won an election, I suspect it will be in play for the next four years. My advice is to speak out for justice when and where it’s possible. Then go have a margarita, if you can find one.
In the wake of the killing of Tyre Nichols by members of the Memphis Police Department’s SCORPION Unit in January 2023, the Department of Justice (DOJ) initiated an investigation of the MPD to determine if officers regularly violated citizens’ rights. After 18 months of reviewing case files and video, interviewing Memphians, riding along with officers, and observing the inner workings of the MPD, the DOJ released its findings on December 4th. The 70-page report concludes, “After an extensive investigation, the Department of Justice has reasonable cause to believe that the MPD and the city engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law.”
“Don’t Kill Me!”
The DOJ investigators highlighted four key findings: 1. MPD uses excessive force. 2. MPD conducts unlawful stops, searches, and arrests. 3. MPD unlawfully discriminates against Black people in its enforcement activities. 4. The city and MPD unlawfully discriminate in their response to people with behavioral health disabilities. To support these findings, investigators cited numerous instances of violence by MPD officers against the citizens of Memphis. “Excessive force is routine in MPD,” DOJ investigators write. “Officers use force as a first resort, demand unquestioning obedience, and exact punishment if they do not receive it.”
Nine police cars and 12 officers responded to a call where a mentally ill man stole a $2 soft drink from a convenience store. After he put his hands up to surrender, he was beaten. He screamed, “Don’t kill me!” and tried to run away. He was subdued and repeatedly tased while face-down on the ground, then served two days in jail for disorderly conduct and theft.
In another case, three officers tackled a man who had littered in a public park. “The man had done nothing wrong, but was ‘talking all this shit,’ according to one officer, and would not tell the officers his name. When the man dropped his drink while leaving the park, four officers surrounded him. … While handcuffed in the patrol car later, the man told a lieutenant that he was trying to follow the officers’ directions, but they had already decided to charge him: ‘I even offered to pick the can up.’”
The DOJ report finds fatal flaws in the MPD’s frontline strategy. “Memphis has relied on traffic stops to address violent crime. The police department has encouraged officers in specialized units, task forces, and patrol to prioritize street enforcement. Officers and community members have described this approach as ‘saturation,’ or flooding neighborhoods with traffic stops. This strategy involves frequent contact with the public and gives wide discretion to officers, which requires close supervision and clear rules to direct officers’ activity. But MPD does not ensure that officers conduct themselves in a lawful manner.”
In two instances cited in the report, officers followed drivers to their destinations and confronted them for traffic violations. One woman was standing on the porch of a relative’s house. After she didn’t produce ID and told the police they were “not welcome on the property,” officers cuffed her, roughed her up, and threatened to pepper spray her. The report states, “After locking her in a police car, one officer asked, ‘So what did we see her do?’ When an officer suggested the woman’s car had improperly tinted windows, another officer responded, ‘All this for a tint?’ The officer shook his head and gestured with his hand that the woman talked too much.”
In another incident, officers forced their way into the home of a woman accused of driving with expired tags and failing to stop at a stop sign. “No exigent circumstances demanded they enter the woman’s home, and the officers had no justification to use force to push their way inside for a nonviolent traffic infraction,” reads the report. After arresting the woman in front of her crying child, “… one officer reflected, ‘In the grand scheme of things, this does not seem like it was worth it.’”
Officers frequently use potentially deadly neck restraints, similar to the one Minneapolis Police Department members applied fatally to George Floyd when he was killed in 2020. In Memphis, an intoxicated man was repeatedly choked into submission until he urinated on himself. “He was not charged with any crime.”
After offering a ride home to a man suffering a mental health crisis, the police uncovered an outstanding warrant for theft. The officer pulled the man from the police car, saying, “You’re fixing to get your ass whupped.” When the man tried to flee, the officer beat him and put him in a neck restraint.
Officers were frequently observed beating, tasing, and pepper spraying people who were already restrained and posed no threat. “One officer hit a handcuffed man in the face and torso with a baton eight times.”
In addition, “Officers repeatedly permitted police dogs to bite or continue to bite people, including children, who were nonresistant and attempting to surrender.”
In one incident, an officer investigating a stolen vehicle report “fired at a car at least eight times at a fast food drive-thru in the middle of the day, jeopardizing other officers and bystanders. … MPD’s investigation improperly found that this use of deadly force was justified.”
In a sidebar titled “Sick of his fucking mouth,” the DOJ investigators write, “MPD officers escalate incidents involving minor offensives by responding to perceived insults, disrespect, or ‘verbal resistance’ with unconstitutional force. … Some MPD officers seem to believe that questioning their authority justifies force — as one supervisor told us, ‘If someone says, “I ain’t under arrest,” that’s resisting arrest right there.’”
Children were not spared the MPD’s methods. When one 16-year-old girl called police to report that she had been assaulted, she ended up in handcuffs. “After three hours, officers removed the handcuffs to reposition them. As she complained that her hands were hurt and swollen and tried to move her wrists, the officers grabbed her and pushed her face down onto the ground to handcuff her again. The girl was then arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.”
When officers were dispersing a crowd after a fight at a high school football game, one officer singled out a “relatively small-statured teen girl trying to leave the premises, yelling ‘Bye! Bye!’ at her. The officer’s taunts provoked the girl, who talked back. In response, the officer shoved the girl, yelling, ‘Get out this motherfuckin’ lot.’ The girl pushed back, and two other officers approached the girl from behind and threw her on the ground. The officers then lifted the girl in the air and slammed her face down into the pavement. The officer who started the altercation told her to ‘Get your dumb ass up,’ and called her a ‘stupid bitch’ as the girl was led away in handcuffs.”
When officers chased two Black boys, aged 15 and 16, who were suspected of a curfew violation, one officer, who had dropped his mobile phone in the chase, said, “I am fucking these little kids up, man. … I am fucking you all up. I just wanted to let y’all know that.”
In another incident, “One officer shot a teenager, and then another officer hit the teenager three times in the head with the butt of his handgun and at least 12 times with a closed fist. The teen was disarmed, seriously injured, and posed no threat at the time. Prosecutors later sent a letter to MPD stating that they ‘seriously considered recommending criminal charges’ against the officer because of the ‘more than one dozen closed fist punches to the face’ that the officer delivered. The prosecutors wrote, ‘We trust that you will handle this as an internal matter and leave it to your sound discretion.’ We saw no evidence that any further investigation took place or that any discipline was imposed. The officer remains employed at MPD.”
The report concludes, “Supervisors do not address these recurrent practices, and some at MPD defend these practices. As one field training officer told us, ‘We’re not excessive enough with these criminals. We baby them.’”
Black People Bear the Brunt
On page 37 of the report, DOJ investigators write, “MPD’s own data show that across a range of different law enforcement actions, MPD treats Black people more harshly than white people when they engage in similar conduct.”
While 64 percent of Memphians are Black, 81 percent of the MPD’s traffic violations are issued to Black people. Officers issued 33.2 percent more moving violations in predominately Black neighborhoods than they did in predominately white neighborhoods. Black drivers were cited for equipment violations at 4.5 times the rate of white drivers; for improperly tinted windows, the rate was 9.8 times. Public health data indicates that both Black and white people use cannabis at the same rate, but MPD arrested Black people for marijuana possession at more than five times the rate of white people.
The report found that the MPD stopped and cited one Black man 30 times in three years. In another case, “MPD stopped a Black man outside a dollar store ‘due to multiple robberies of dollar stores in the area,’ according to the police report. The officers had no reason to suspect that this particular man took part in the robberies, and the man told them he was just waiting for a friend. When he didn’t leave or produce ID, police handcuffed him, beat him with a baton, and pepper sprayed him. The officers had no reason to believe that the man engaged in criminal activity and lacked reasonable suspicion to stop him. But they arrested him anyway, and he spent a night in jail. Prosecutors declined to pursue any charges stemming from the incident. After the incident, the man noted, ‘They had no reason to do this. And they’re out here doing this to people every day.’”
Mental Health Crisis
In 1988, after the MPD killed a mentally ill man who was cutting himself, the city founded the Crisis Intervention Team (CIT). Composed of officers who have specialized training in dealing with behavioral health issues, the CIT became a model other city’s police departments emulated. But the DOJ found “serious problems with the CIT program,” and that “officers often escalate behavioral encounters and use combative tactics almost immediately after arriving to behavioral health calls. … We observed CIT officers in Memphis belittle and mock people with behavioral health disabilities. In one incident, a CIT officer hit a man in the head and threatened him with a Taser while officers called him a ‘motherfucker,’ ‘bitch,’ and a ‘dumbass.’” One CIT officer earned the nickname “Taser Face.”
One 8-year-old Black boy with four behavioral health diagnoses encountered the MPD nine times between December 2021 and August 2023. He was threatened with tasing, handcuffed, and repeatedly thrown onto a couch. In one incident, when the boy stuck out his tongue, the CIT officer responded by bending his arm back and screaming, “I can break your arm with the snap of my wrist.”
The report says that while 75 percent of 911 calls involving people with mental illness are nonviolent, “MPD’s training on behavioral health primes officers to approach people with behavioral health disabilities with force and aggression, and our review revealed they often do. For instance, a training given to all new officers erroneously teaches that people with bipolar disorder do not feel pain.”
The City Responds
At a press conference on December 5, 2024, Mayor Paul Young responded to the DOJ’s findings — while repeatedly emphasizing that he had not read the report. “I believe that even one incident of mistreatment by the police is one too many. … The report the DOJ released last night is going to be difficult to read. Some of the incidents the DOJ report described are simply not acceptable, and our hearts go out to every person who has been impacted by those actions.”
In cities such as Seattle, New Orleans, and Chicago which have previously been the subject of DOJ investigations, city governments entered into consent decrees, negotiated with the DOJ, that outline the steps police departments must take to improve. At the press conference, Young ruled out signing such a decree. “We believe adjustments we’ve already begun making must continue, and that they must expand. It’s my job as mayor to fight for the best interests of our entire community. Every member. After carefully considering the information we received from DOJ, we didn’t believe that entering into any agreement in principle or consent decree right now, before even thoroughly reading the DOJ report, would be in the best interest of our community. It’s crucial that the city has the time to do a thorough review and respond to the findings before agreeing to anything that could become a long-term financial burden to our residents, and could, in fact, actually slow down our ongoing efforts to continuously improve our police department.”
Young cited recent statistics which show a 13 percent drop in crime overall, and a 19 percent drop in violent crimes. Police Chief C.J. Davis echoed the mayor’s position that the department is on the right track. “In some of the areas that have been outlined in the report, we have made significant changes aligned with the Department of Justice, getting their support with some of the training that has been ongoing, not just this year, but in previous years.”
In response to the sections of the report regarding the MPD’s treatment of children, Davis said, “We spend a lot of time with our children in our community. We graduated over a thousand children from our D.A.R.E./G.R.E.A.T. program, and work consistently to try to improve those relationships. We’re going to look through the report to ensure that we’re not missing anything.”
Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy has studied the full report. “I think it’s very concerning and shouldn’t be dismissed. I still think the vast majority of folks on the force are people of good faith. They have a hard job, having to make quick decisions in stressful, sometimes dangerous situations. But that doesn’t mean there can’t be systemic issues of culture, training, and supervision that cry out for reform.”
When Shahidah Jones of the Official Black Lives Matter Memphis Chapter read the report, she recalls thinking, “Not to be cynical, but it was just like, ‘Duh.’ We didn’t choose to target police because we didn’t have anything else to do or we were looking at these one-off instances. A very large part of organizing is for us to learn history and do our political study. … This is not something new. This is the way police have been taught to operate.”
Josh Spickler, executive director of criminal justice-reform nonprofit Just City, agrees. “I’m not particularly surprised by the report. I recognize some of these stories, some of the examples from media reports. Many of these things are well-documented and well-known incidents. And the findings are bad and awful, and as even Mayor Young said, hard to read, but they are not surprising.”
For Amber Sherman, who lobbied the city council for reform in the wake of the Tyre Nichols killing, the report felt like vindication. “My immediate action really was that it just corroborated everything that, you know, we as organizers here in Memphis have been saying for so long, especially with Decarcerate Memphis, where we’ve been really pressing the issue about pretextual stops and how dangerous they are.”
Decarcerate Memphis’ Alex Hensley, who drafted the reform ordinances which were passed by the city council in reduced forms after the Tyre Nichols killing, says she, too, feels vindicated by the report. “Activists and organizers have been saying all of these things for years on end, and then to have the DOJ — which is a policing entity, by the way — to say that, yeah, we need to not prioritize these low-level violations.”
DA Mulroy says, “We need to rethink about using specialized units for routine enforcement. And distinguish between traffic stops that actually affect safety or real crime, like moving violations and drive-out tag fraud violations, which make sense. But some of these minor equipment violations, the data shows the hit rate on those is very low — you’re talking like 2 to 3 percent of the time do you find weapons or drugs or somebody that’s wanted on a serious charge. But the data also show those are precisely the types of offenses that are associated with racial profiling. You really have to think about what kind of a bang you’re getting for your buck. You’re potentially alienating the community that you most want to cooperate with law enforcement because they’re the ones who see the crime.”
City council member Dr. Jeff Warren said he had not yet read the report. “If you remember, around the time that Black Lives Matter occurred after the George Floyd killing, the council began a process where we were involved with the police department, trying to initiate reforms. Some of the reforms that we actually initiated were negated by the state legislature. … I think we’ve been in the process of reform since this current police chief came on board; we’re doing that right now. That’s one of the reasons I don’t really think that the city needs to be entering into a consent decree that will cost taxpayers multiple millions of dollars, when it’s something we’re already trying to do.”
When asked about the DOJ’s finding that MPD recruits are taught that people with bipolar disorder cannot feel pain, Warren, a family physician, responded, “I don’t know where they got that from. Just because it’s written in a report doesn’t mean that’s the truth.”
The treatment of what the MPD calls “mental consumers” is one issue where there may be consensus on reform. The DOJ report cites multiple high-ranking MPD officers, as well as Memphis Fire Department officials and 911 call-takers, who believe that a new department specializing in mental health situations is needed to shift the burden from the MPD.
“We should listen to them on that,” says Hensley. “If this city is so pro-police, listen to them on this subject. Clearly, there are a lot of mental health calls and a lot of mental health issues within our community that I think tie back to these issues of poverty, lack of housing, lack of investments in basic necessities. We have to come up with something different.”
Spickler says, “There’s data that shows that most interactions with people in mental health crises are not violent. There are ways of responding that wouldn’t lead you to have to tell people falsely that people with bipolar don’t feel pain. One of the great suggestions of this report is that we don’t have to send an armed person to some of the things that we send them to, like a stranded motorist, traffic accidents, and mental health calls. These are all things that can be handled with someone who has safety and resolution as their mission and not what we have in this police department — and most police departments, frankly — and that is a warrior mentality. There’s an arrogance to it, and there’s an offensiveness to it.
“There’s nothing about policing that should be offensive. It’s ‘to protect and serve,’ right? Many police departments across America have tried to shift to a guardian model, which is how policing, I think, is most effective. But throughout that report, you see very clear evidence that that is not the case at the Memphis Police Department. There is no guardian mentality. It’s not taught; it’s not modeled. It’s really not expected. What is expected is that you get what you want by whatever means necessary.”
Will Anything Change?
The election of Donald Trump, who has promised a “brutal approach” to law enforcement, has brought the next steps into question. Whether a future DOJ would sue to impose a settlement with the city is an open question.
“I’m not gonna speculate about their motivations, but I think it’s obvious to anybody that there’s a very good chance that a lot of this will be dropped or, at a minimum, they’ll be less aggressive about enforcing it with the new administration,” says DA Mulroy. “We’ve seen that before with the prior Trump administration. That could be anyone’s calculus in dealing with the aftermath of November 5th.”
At his press conference, Mayor Young said, “We would have the same position regardless of the outcome of the presidential election.”
A consent decree with the DOJ would result in federal monitors being assigned to the MPD in order to ensure that they do not violate citizens’ constitutional rights. In his regular Friday email on December 6th, Young wrote, “Instead of a broad and potentially prolonged federal oversight via a consent decree — which could impose millions in costs on our residents — we believe by taking a holistic, community-focused approach we can move further and faster toward the change we need with less cost to our community.”
These costs must be weighed against the costs of not acting, says Hensley. “I think they’re going to pay for it one way or another. First of all, they’re bloating the costs. We’ve looked at other cities, some of them have been high, but it’s spread out over time. There are just all these other elements that are being left out to make it seem like we’re going to go bankrupt next year. That’s disingenuous. Tyre Nichols’ family is suing them for $500 million — and that’s just one person. I’m not their chief financial officer, but you can look at that clearly and see the costs are going to be far worse if they don’t sign the consent decree, or if they don’t do these reforms.”
Uncertainty over President-elect Donald Trump’s plans for federal tax credits and loan programs supporting American electric vehicle manufacturing could stall Tennessee’s fast-growing electric vehicle and clean energy industries, analysts say.
Tennessee has seen an estimated $12.6 billion in investments in new clean energy projects since the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act under President Joe Biden in 2022, according to an October Washington Post analysis of data from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and energy think tank Rhodium Group.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) created more than 20 tax incentives for clean energy and manufacturing, marking one of the largest climate investments in American history. No Republican lawmakers voted for the act, but the Post’s analysis found “red” states – including Tennessee – have so far received the lion’s share of investment dollars following its passage.
Low-cost federal loans and tax credits for U.S.-produced batteries and battery components have helped companies stand up more cost-competitive electric vehicle plants in the United States, said Harrison Godfrey, managing director of clean energy industry association Advanced Energy United. The IRA also changed consumer electric vehicle tax credits to incentivize the industry to anchor in the United States; For the credit to apply, vehicles must have batteries made in the U.S. using materials sourced from the U.S. or some allied nations, Godfrey said.
But Trump’s transition team is reportedly planning to scrap the $7,500 tax credit for buyers who purchase new electric vehicles, Reuters reported Friday. And the fate of Biden-era clean energy programs remains unclear.
This is not a red state, blue state economic development story. This is an all of America economic development and manufacturing resurgence story, and Tennessee is a great example of how this resurgence, this growth, is serving ‘red’ America.
– Harrison Godfrey, Advanced Energy United
Energy industry analysts worry such a rollback would stymie the balance of producer and consumer-facing incentives.
“The fundamental thing to understand about that is that the two work in conjunction,” Godfrey said. “It’s not enough just to have one side of that policy … it’s great if we’re standing up factories, but if there’s nobody buying at the end of the assembly line for those components, for that finished vehicle, because we haven’t also helped support that consumption side of the equation … we see great investments that do not actually bear fruit.”
Dozens of bills seeking to rescind parts of the IRA have been considered in the House of Representatives in the last two years, but 18 members of the House Republican Conference wrote in favor of maintaining the IRA’s energy tax credits in an August letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson.
“Prematurely repealing energy tax credits, particularly those which were used to justify investments that already broke ground, would undermine private investments and stop development that is already ongoing,” the letter states. “A full repeal would create a worst-case scenario where we would have spent billions of taxpayer dollars and received next to nothing in return.”
Jack Conness, a policy analyst at energy and climate think tank Energy Innovation, points to the letter as an example of the difference between rhetoric and reality in discussions about repealing parts of the IRA. The reality, he said, is that post-IRA investments have had “significant impact on economic growth and jobs” in red Congressional districts.
“Businesses have been operating under the assumption and making large investments in places like Western Tennessee on the assumption that this policy survives,” Conness said. “So when you want to potentially shake this up, it causes total chaos and havoc on the private business side.”
Electric vehicle and battery industries flock to Tennessee
These policies helped boost projects like Ford’s BlueOval City and the BlueOval SK battery plant in West Tennessee. The companies announced the plant’s development in Haywood County 2021. The U.S. Department of Energy approved a conditional loan of up to $9.2 billion to BlueOval SK under the IRA to build three battery plants in Tennessee and Kentucky last summer.
Godfrey said the future of the Loan Programs Office and its low-cost loan programs for EV and EV component manufacturers is a “big outstanding question.”
“If you deconstruct that, if you shutter the office or if you greatly reduce the size, shift that mission, I think there’s risk there that we don’t see additional projects like this funded in the future,” he said.
But while some factories have secured their IRA loans, the ink isn’t yet dry on loans like BlueOval SK’s, which is still in the conditional phase.
U.S. Rep. David Kustoff’s West Tennessee district has seen $7.9 billion in investment since the IRA’s passage, according to the Post analysis, followed by U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles’ Middle Tennessee with $2.9 billion.
Both voted against the IRA. Neither could be immediately reached for comment.
Kustoff said in 2022 that the “radical spending bill” would “hurt energy producers” and “certainly worsen inflation,” among other things. Ogles called it a “gross waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Both have said BlueOval City and BlueOval SK will be transformational for the region.
Since 2022, EV component supplier Magna announced it would build the first two supplier facilities in BlueOval City’s Stanton supplier park, and a stamping and assembly facility in Lawrenceburg. NOVONIX Anode Materials announced a new $1 billion battery plant in Chattanooga. Ultium Cells announced a $275 million expansion of its plant in Spring Hill.
According to the Post’s analysis, post-IRA investments have spanned multiple Congressional districts in Tennessee:
Diana Harshbarger (R), District 1: $17 million Charles Fleischmann (R), District 3: $746 million Scott DesJarlais (R), District 4: $146 million Mark Green (R), District 7: $672 million Steve Cohen (D), District 9: $189 million
“This is not a red state, blue state economic development story,” Godfrey said. “This is an all of America economic development and manufacturing resurgence story, and Tennessee is a great example of how this resurgence, this growth, is serving ‘red’ America.”
Industry Turbulence
The EV industry’s expansion in Tennessee — and the United States — has not been without setbacks.
Ford announced it would push back production of its new, all-electric pickup truck from 2025 to 2027 as part of its response to heightened competition in the EV market and slowing demand. But BlueOval SK is expected to begin producing battery cells in late 2025.
Nissan announced it will cut 9,000 jobs and 20% of its global manufacturing capacity in November after a drop in profit. It’s not clear if the Nissan Smyrna Vehicle Assembly Plant will be impacted.
General Motors announced it will lay off 1,000 employees — mostly from its global technical center in Warren, Michigan — on Nov. 15. The company’s largest facility in North America is in Spring Hill.
Godfrey said all industries see “waxes and wanes” during growth, and the EV industry has been under a microscope in recent years. Progress doesn’t tend to be illustrated quarterly, but over years or decades, he said.
Conness said flirting with the idea of a repeal of IRA programs causes uncertainty to flare.
“The private market wants to know what’s happening on the policy side, and the private market has been pretty outspoken about keeping IRA,” he said.
Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk, who has become a close associate of Trump, has spoken in favor of stripping the tax credit.
Musk wrote, “Take away the subsidies. It will only help Tesla. Also, remove subsidies from all industries!” on his social media site X in July. In a Tesla earnings call that month, he mused that ending the tax credits would be “devastating” for Tesla competitors but “long-term probably actually helps Tesla.” (Tesla has reaped some benefits from federal loan programs, tax credits and carbon credits).
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation — which represents 42 U.S. automotive companies including GM, Ford, Nissan and Volkswagen — penned a letter to Republican lawmakers in October asserting that the IRA’s EV tax credits are “critical to cementing the U.S. as a global leader in the future of automotive technology and manufacturing.”
“We think about the recent decades where we’ve seen much of the heartland of America, and particularly some of the industrial cities that were really prosperous and vital in the 20th Century collapse on themselves. It’s about the shrinking and departure of these anchor tenants … the major manufacturers there,” Godfrey said. “So the real risk is … if we see a pullback on the industrial policy that is helping support that resurgence, I think we could see a replay of what we’ve seen in a lot of these towns over the past 40-plus years, admittedly for slightly different reasons.”
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.
Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, who never lets a chance to try to steer public funding to private schools pass him by, is having a good week. State Senate and House majority leaders filed identical bills to create “Education Freedom Scholarships” that would give $7,075 in public funding for a private education to 20,000 Tennessee students, beginning in the fall of 2025. The plan would grow in scope in subsequent years.
The bill has been opposed by the state’s large city school systems and by legislators in many rural districts, where there are often no private school options, and where getting adequate funding for public schools is often difficult. The voucher bill is also opposed by the vast majority of the state’s public school teachers.
That’s bad enough, but later in the week, Voucher Bill (see what I did there?) got more good news. In case you haven’t been paying attention, GOP luminaries of all stripes are now urging the abolishment of the federal Department of Education. See, that way, supporters say, the money from the feds would come directly into the state’s coffers, to be dispensed under the supervision of, well, Bill Lee. Shocker, right? It should come as no surprise that Lee is all for killing the education department.
“We know Tennessee. We know our children,” Lee said. “We know the needs here much better than a bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., does.”
No you don’t, Bill. What you know how to do — and what you have tried to do for years — is slide public tax dollars into the coffers of private education firms that will then grease the palms of pols such as yourself. If you cared about Tennessee’s children, you wouldn’t want to funnel our tax dollars to well-off Tennesseans who will use it for tuition fees for little Bradley’s third-grade year at Hillbilly Bible Kollege.
Lee and the GOP have been fighting for vouchers to become law for years, and this time around, given the upcoming change in the White House, they might have the juice to pull it off. If the last election proved anything, it is that the average American is anything but well-informed and well-educated. One of the most googled questions on Election Day was, “Did Joe Biden drop out?” Lawd, help us.
Here are a few numbers to ponder (and weep over): 21 percent of adults in the U.S. are illiterate; 54 percent of adults have a literacy below 6th grade level; 45 million read below a 5th grade level; 44 percent of American adults do not read a book in a year. So yeah, let’s fix that by cutting public school funding and giving people money to send their kids to private schools.
My parents weren’t rich, but I grew up privileged. Only we didn’t call it privilege back then because it was so ordinary. In the small Midwestern town where we lived, everybody I knew — Black, white, brown, poor, middle-class, or wealthy — went to the same public schools and attended the town’s single public high school.
It was a great equalizer, and kids learned — sometimes the hard way — not to get too snooty. I’m not so naive as to think that my Black classmates didn’t suffer negative experiences that were beyond the experiences I had, but we did all manage to get along. And we all had the same opportunity to learn with the same teachers, using the same facilities in the same classrooms, no matter a family’s income level. That is a great and powerful thing about public education — it’s an equalizer. But it needs to be funded and nourished. An investment in educating our youth is one of the best possible uses of our tax dollars. Instead of destroying the Department of Education, we should be funding it better and putting it in the hands of someone with creative ideas to support teachers and inspire students.
I’m not holding my breath, though. I’d put the odds at 50-50 that the Education Department survives the coming administration. And if it does, given the clown-car level of cabinet appointments thus far, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if Trump appointed the My Pillow guy to the job.
In the week since the end of the 2024 presidential campaign, various experts, partisans, and pundits have been holding forth on the meaning of it all.
Well, with your indulgence, it’s my time for a little thumb-sucking. Really, I just wonder how this new order is supposed to work. The incoming Trump administration is pledged, as its first order of business, to expel somewhere between 2 and 20 million undocumented immigrants in what the president-elect has promised will be “the largest mass deportation in this nation’s history.”
Probably a majority of those being targeted are embedded to some degree in the fabric of society — as mothers and fathers and sons and daughters and students and toilers (significantly, in that last category, as taxpayers).
Those Haitians in Springfield, Ohio, who became the bane of Republican rhetoric during the campaign, were not here as scavengers of dogs and cats and geese, nor is there any reason to believe they performed as such. They were not border-jumpers, by the way, but nose-to-the-grindstone workers legally imported to do local infrastructure jobs that native-born sorts wouldn’t touch.
Remember all those new houses that went up during the building boom of the ’90s? To a substantial degree, the grunt work on them was done by Mexicans, most of them undocumented, to be sure.
After the deportation of all these willing hands, there is sure to be some serious attrition within a labor market that is arguably under-strength already.
And what about the sheer expense of such a massive operation, estimated to be as high as $315 billion, and the human costs of all this forced dislocation?
There are few parallels for mass deportations on such a formidable scale, most of them stained by controversy, disrepute, or worse — the Turkish expulsion of Armenians, the German boxcars of Jewish victims eastward to death camps in World War II (and the retributive exodus of that country’s own civilians, driven in the other direction by Russian tanks), the Nakba of Palestinians in 1948, the ethnic cleansings of Yugoslavia in 1992.
Hyperbole? Maybe. But that’s the name I myself would give to the whole imagined immigrant scare.
Compromise. Consensus. Those are indispensable qualities of the democratic process, indeed, of the human contract itself. And there is no sign of them as concepts of this plan — no indication even of a reliable means of distinguishing between the rank and file of the immigrant population and the relative few malefactors that may lurk within them. Nor of an inclination to apply such means.
No provision to earn future citizenship for the long-term residents whose worth as permanent members of the American body politic has already been demonstrated by their conduct and contributions to society. On top of it all is the expressed intent of the incoming administration to renounce that traditional birthright of citizenship that is automatically conferred on those born here.
And the most flagrant cheat of the whole thing? These all-too-disposable migrants are here by express invitation. Latinos in the main, they are — man, woman, and child — the blood brothers and sisters of all the upstart populations that have come to America before them — the Teutons and Anglo-Saxons and Jews and Italians and Slavs and Irish and Asians who, amid unimaginable hardship and life-and-death circumstance, answered the call of one Emma Lazarus, the poet whose words adorn the Statue of Liberty in the beckoning waters of New York harbor:
“… Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Keeping that lamp lit for others, not snuffing it out, should be the concern of those of us fortunate to find ourselves secure behind that door.
I’m writing this on election day. A steady, light rain is trickling down outside my window, the pitter-pattering a calming sound. The sun shines beyond the clouds, but the blue sky is obscured. It’s both gray and bright, with a smattering of yellow and orange leaves in the foreground, ready to shed for the season.
This morning, many of my Facebook friends are sharing in jest what side dishes they’ll bring to the Civil War. Some are posting the reasons they’re steadfast in their choice of voting for Kamala. On the other side, I’ve seen, “If you were looking for a reason to delete me: TRUMP 2024.” While I have my own thoughts and moral standings regarding this presidential election and its candidates, I won’t shout those out here. Each of us is entitled to an opinion, and there’s not much I can do to shift yours. Between endless news coverage and social media, we’ve already been inundated with political ads and info meant to sway us in one direction or another — or more so, to deepen the divide between this country’s citizens.
I grew up in the Mississippi Delta, and much of my family still resides there. Many of them are Trump supporters, or at least staunch Republicans. (And I’m the relative that works for “that liberal paper.”) I know this has to do with generational beliefs passed on through the years and from a perspective that may not be the most informed; perhaps just differently informed. Some people aren’t as open to new ideas as others. Some blindly follow. Some believe what they believe and that’s that. And while we may not agree on many things, and the complicated “why” behind their reasoning for backing certain stances may not make sense to me, I will not be “deleting” them. Should I confess this in the Flyer, a progressive publication? Perhaps not. But I hope you all will try to understand my “why.”
Throughout the past few months, as campaigning reached its peak, I’ve seen more hate spewed — from both sides — than usual. Social media especially can already be a dark and winding environment for those with passionate convictions or high anxiety. It’s easy to get angry, scared, or sad, scrolling through all the muck and misinformation. It’s even easier to argue with those who disagree with your views, to put them down for not sharing your beliefs. It’s often an irrational and brash place.
I’ve seen this hate coming from people who I know are not hateful at their core — good people who give to charity and volunteer, who rescue animals and deeply care for others, even outside of their families. From empathetic people who push for acceptance and inclusion, for human rights and democracy, but viciously bash those who don’t see things their way. Is hate the appropriate response? Is banishment? I may stand slack-jawed at some of what I’m seeing shared on my social feeds from family, friends, and acquaintances, but my reaction is more one of confusion and compassion. (I’ll admit, though, I’ve made use of Facebook’s “snooze” feature during election season to quiet some of the chaos.)
We’re all flesh and bone. We all share the ability to feel emotions. And we each have ideals, aspirations, and experiences unique to us. I assume, too, we’ll all be waiting with bated breath as election results slowly roll in.
Whatever news we go to bed to tonight, or wake up to tomorrow, I expect the outcome to be both gray and bright — as life often is. We don’t yet know what the future holds — we never do. Whatever the result, though, we can always ensure we’re doing all we can to keep shining light in the dark and through the clouds, to advocate and educate, to further freedom — to bring together, not divide.
I’ll leave you with this line from poet Mary Oliver, a mantra we all can call to when things feel overwhelming or grim: “It is a serious thing just to be alive on this fresh morning in the broken world.”
If you’re like me, you’ve spent a lot of time recently reading about — and listening to people talk about — presidential polls. I keep reading and hearing that the race is a toss-up, or worse, that Donald Trump is leading. I don’t buy it. These are the same pollsters who told us Hillary Clinton was a lock in 2016, that Joe Biden would win easily in 2020, and to prepare for a “red wave” in 2022. The polling for those three elections was all over the place and mostly wrong. Polling itself appeared to be broken. What has changed in 2024?
According to a Pew Research analysis, in the 2020 election there were 29 pollsters of record, and nearly all of them used the live-phone-call method. Now that it’s known that hardly anyone, particularly young voters, ever answers an unknown phone call, that methodology is considered unreliable — hopelessly skewed toward lonely geezers desperate to talk to anyone.
In the wake of the 2022 election’s miscalculations, Pew says most pollsters now use combinations of live calling, emailed opt-in surveys, online opt-in surveys, and “probability based panels,” whatever that may be.
Pollsters then take the results of their surveys of, say, 1,237 people, and “weight” them, using various percentage models, trying to suss out how many young voters will turn out, how many Republicans who pull an early ballot will vote for a Democrat, how many women of both parties will vote for abortion rights, how the large contingent of independent voters will swing, how likely a “likely voter” is to vote. Bear in mind, they don’t know any of this information. They’re estimating these weighted numbers and hoping to get an accurate prediction of election results for 150 million voters by extrapolating, typically, from fewer than 3,000 voters.
In a New York Times analysis of the 2020 election, Larry J. Sabato, a professor at the University of Virginia discussed how the electorate had changed from 2016: “Trump’s appeal to college-educated whites, especially women, was never very strong. Trump’s character and antics in office sent his backing among this large group plummeting. Blue-collar and rural whites loved it, but their numbers could not substitute for losses elsewhere.”
Does anyone really think Trump has strengthened his appeal to women and college-educated whites in the past four years? I don’t. And polls, for what they’re worth, show just the opposite has happened.
And consider this: In the 2020 presidential election, population density was arguably the single most-dominant element. Biden won the presidency while carrying only 16 percent of America’s counties. In fact, the most reliable predictor of voting patterns in the United States in recent years is rural versus urban/suburban. And guess which of these is declining in population. Hint: It’s not cities and suburbs. Rural and small-town America are shrinking under the crushing double whammy of corporate farming and the Walmart-ization of local town-square businesses. Trump won 84 percent of America’s counties, but his human voter base is shriveling. Acreage doesn’t vote. I find that encouraging when considering how 2024 might turn out.
Here’s another way to look at the race: Use your own eyes and ears. Look at the large, noisy, rabid turnout for Kamala Harris’ events and contrast that with the half-empty, sad-trombone “rallies” of Donald Trump rambling on for two hours, doing his “Scary Home Companion” riffs as his cult-fans trek to the exits. His campaign reminds me of the Seinfeld “Festivus” episode, with its “airing of grievances” and “feats of strength” rituals.
Does any of this say “momentum” to you? It doesn’t to me.
Trump has never gotten more than 47 percent of the electorate to vote for him. His “platform” consists of trying to scare his (mostly) white supporters with horror stories about Black and brown people stealing their jobs, eating their pets, taking over cities, and committing horrific crimes. Oh, and LGBTQ people are coming to change your gender and make you marry them. So be very afraid and vote GOP, because we’re like you: Real Americans!
What percentage of Americans will fall for this pseudo-fascist act in 2024 is still unknown, but it’s never been a majority of us, which is a comfort of sorts. The scariest part, as always, is the waiting. Well, that and the Electoral College. And now I’m worried again. Dang it.
Mempho Music Festival brought an act for every taste to the Radians Amphitheater last weekend. But the MEMernet raved over Jack White’s performance. As our own Chris McCoy said, White was “simply operating on another level than everyone else.”
Bass fish
The MEMernet can be every bit as tough and gritty as our city. But sometimes you slow your scroll for a bit of pure, simple delight. That’s the case for Parkway Village North neighbor Yimy Perez who posed with a great catch over the weekend and the title, simply “bass fish.”
Why Trump?
Alton R. Williams just came right out with it — and clearly broke federal law — last week in a sermon titled “Why Trump?” Again, the Johnson Amendment says churches could lose their tax-exempt status if they preach politics from the pulpit.
“The Democrat party, I’m gonna say it tonight so you won’t be confused, is the anti-Christ party,” Williams said. “It is anti-family. And I’m going to say this — and you ain’t gonna believe it — but it is anti-Black folk. You’re only needed for votes. You’re only loved when it comes time to vote.”
Federal law says churches could lose their tax-exempt status if they preach politics from the pulpit. That didn’t stop Alton R. Williams from unleashing a sermon called “Seeing the Election Through God’s Eyes” last week.
In it, Williams painted Kamala Harris (and mispronounced her first name like Trump does) as a socialist, said the government is coming for people’s guns, that one political party (wink, wink) is letting immigrants in (including from the Middle East, which is “nothing but terrorists”), that “they” are setting the stage for a race war between Black and brown people, with abortion “they’ll kill a baby in a minute,” and just so much more.
Maybe he mentioned Donald Trump over the hour-long sermon. We just couldn’t hang around that long to find out. But the “Why Trump?” section of the church’s website will tell you all you need to know.
Any cops out there enforcing the Johnson Amendment?
MonoNeon Gold
MonoNeon gave Trump his unique treatment a couple of weeks ago and it’s simply amazing. The Memphis musician overdubs viral video clips with his bass. For example, Trump’s debate screed about immigrants eating pets transforms into a funky R&B thing with soaring background vocals.