Tennessee’s attorney general says he will not defend a state law passed this summer that makes it a felony for public officials to vote in favor of sanctuary city policies.
The law was passed as a part of an omnibus immigration bill this past session. In June, the ACLU of Tennessee filed a lawsuit challenging the part of the law that singles out votes in favor of sanctuary city policies. Such measures — which limit cooperation between local government and immigration officials — have been prohibited in Tennessee since 2019. The new law took that ban a step further, saying that any local officials who merely cast a vote in favor of such policies could be charged with a Class E felony, and the attorney general could initiate the process to have them removed from office.
The ACLU, which filed the suit on behalf of seven members of Nashville’s Metro Council, said that the law is a violation of the First Amendment.
“It threatens really basic principles of the democratic process,” Stella Yarbrough, ACLU-TN’s legal director, told WPLN earlier this summer. “When you criminalize the vote based on its content, that is viewpoint discrimination. The government is saying, ‘this viewpoint is okay. This viewpoint is not okay.’ And that is something that the First Amendment just doesn’t tolerate.”
Now, Tennessee Attorney General Johnathan Skrmetti has agreed that the law is in violation of the Constitution.
“In response to a recent lawsuit, our office has determined we cannot defend provisions of a new law that punish local officials for voting for sanctuary policies,” Skrmetti said in a statement to WPLN News. “The Constitution provides absolute immunity for all legislative votes, whether at the federal, state, or local levels. Regardless of these challenged sections, Tennessee law continues to make it illegal for cities and counties to enact sanctuary laws. Any sanctuary cities will lose state funding until they comply with the law.”
House Majority Leader William Lamberth, who sponsored the bill, said that he “has full confidence” in the attorney general’s evaluation.
“On this particular issue, [Skrmetti] has concluded that success is unlikely and I respect his analysis,” Lamberth said. “Republicans will never allow Nashville or any city in our state to break our laws, undermine national security or endanger the well-being of Tennesseans by becoming a sanctuary for criminals. Should any local governing body pursue such policies, we will take decisive action to hold them accountable through other avenues.”
The other parts of the new immigration law — like the creation of a new immigration enforcement division and the creation of a separate driver’s license for undocumented Tennesseans — were not challenged in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit sought declaratory judgement, meaning plaintiffs were looking for the court to define the legal landscape and rule on the constitutionality of the law. Then, last month, the ACLU and the state asked judges for time to “explore settlement.” Now, given the Attorney General’s stance, the case seems geared for settlement, although it does remain listed as active in Davidson County Chancery Court.
Copyright 2025 WPLN
