Image Credit: Tennessee Attorney General / Facebook & Canva
By John Harris [Executive Director of Tennessee Firearms Association] –
On September 10, 2025, the three-judge panel that ruled two of Tennessee’s gun control statutes unconstitutional and void likewise completely rejected the request of Governor Bill Lee, Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and the other state Defendants to allow them to continue to ignore the court’s ruling and to thereby continue to enforce these statutes pending the state Defendants’ appeal.
The Panel did not merely deny the motion, it shredded it piece by piece. (Ruling is on TFA website report) For example, the state Defendants bemoaned that the Panel’s ruling would allow drunks to carry firearms in public and that it would allow 10 year olds to take semi-automatic rifles to his (or her) recreational league ball games.
In responding to these spurious arguments, the Panel stated:
… the Court would like to address a few of the Defendants’ hypotheticals that allegedly result from this Panel’s holding. Defendants posit that “a ten- year-old [now can] bring a semi-automatic rifle to his rec league basketball game.” Of course, federal law prohibits minors from obtaining firearms from dealers, 18 U.S.C. § 922(b )(1), and Tennessee law likewise prohibits the sale, loan or gifting of a firearm to a minor. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1303. Defendants also speculate that an armed drunk person might “stumble through a crowd” in public places. Certainly, the State is aware that Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-132 l provides that “[n]otwithstanding whether a person has a permit issued pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351 or § 39-17-1366, it is an offense for a person to possess a handgun while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance or controlled substance analogue.” Furthermore, section (b) of said statute provides that “[i]t is an offense for a person to possess a firearm if the person is both: (1) [w]ithin the confines of an establishment open to the public where liquor, wine or other alcoholic beverages, as defined in§ 57-3-l0l(a), or beer, as defined in§ 57-6-102, are served for consumption on the premises; and (2) [c]onsuming any alcoholic beverage listed in subdivision (b)(l). Lastly, Tennessee also criminalizes disorderly conduct, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-305, which certainly would include a drunk “creat[ing] a hazardous condition … in a public place.” In summary, there are numerous laws already on the books to prevent Defendants’ hypotheticals. In any event, to the extent there is a need for further constitutional enactments after this Court’s opinion, the General Assembly is free to act as its constituency directs at any time.
Order Denying Stay, p. 4
Then in response to the state Defendants’ claims that the consequences of the Panel’s ruling striking down unconstitutional laws because the state’s entire firearms regulatory framework is built on this unconstitutional policy (that the Legislature has flatly refused to address), the Panel noted that policy concerns cannot be used as an excuse to infringe constitutionally protected rights.
… to additional concerns of uncertainty and confusion in the wake of the General Assembly constructing a regulatory framework on top of an unconstitutional foundation, the Court emphasizes that admittedly practical policy concerns cannot override the constitutional rights of the citizenry. Indeed, we additionally refer Defendants to the motto on the Seal of the Tennessee Judiciary — fiat justitia ruat coelum, “[a] Latin phrase that … means, ‘ Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.”‘ Tennessee Supreme Court Issues Statement on Commitment to Equal Justice, Tennessee Courts (June 25, 2020), …
Order Denying Stay, pp. 4-5.
Further, the state Defendants had asserted that the Panel’s ruling had done something it simply did not do – that it removed the unconstitutional statutes from the published Tennessee Code Annotated. Once again, the Panel addressed the state Defendants’ mischaraterizations of the facts and law.
To their second assertion that the Court exceeded the constitutional bounds of judicial power …. we instead determined and declared Plaintiffs’ rights in relation to unconstitutional statutes because ‘”a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law’ at all.” Id. (quoting Marbury, 5 U.S. at 177). Our declaration that the Going Armed and Parks Statutes were “unconstitutional, void, and of no effect” was the simple recognition of this reality. This declaration was already limited in scope by the nature of declaratory relief, and the Court declined to limit that relief further as Defendants asked because we saw no basis for doing so. In short, we did not rip the challenged statutes out of the Tennessee Code as Defendants seem to suggest. “Instead, the Court recognized only that the Constitution had ‘automatically displace[d]’ the [Going Armed and Parks Statutes] from the start.” Id. at 529 (quoting Collins v. Yellen, 141 S. Ct. 1761, 1788 (2021)).
Order Denying Stay, pp. 3-4.
Tennesseans can expect that Governor Bill Lee, Attorney General Skrmetti and the other state Defendants will now ask the Tennessee Court of Appeals to stay the Panel’s ruling pending the appeal. Again, these public officials who took sworn oaths of office to uphold the constitutions and to protect the rights of the citizens are using taxpayer funds to attack your rights. The Panel has refused to let them do that and we can hope that the Court of Appeals will do likewise.
Yet, Tennesseans and the visitors to our state are seeing clearly that their constitutionally protected rights not only are under attack by Bill Lee, Jonathan Skrmetti, his staff attorneys, and state agencies. But, they are also seeing that Tennessee’s Republican controlled super-majority in the Legislature has been a complete failure under their individual oaths to uphold and protect the constitutional rights of individuals. Fault there falls on individual legislators (not those who have truly tried to correct this problem) and falls particularly on the shoulders of those Republicans who hold leadership positions in either the House or the Senate.
What can you do now?
- take copies of the opinion and TFA’s reports to your legislators and demand answers as to why they failed to take action so that this lawsuit would not have been required.
- ask your legislators whether they opposed, supported or just sat by silently on the issue of the appeal.
- ask your legislators for copies of their communications with the Governor or the Attorney General concerning this lawsuit or the appeal and provide those to TFA to share with others
- ask your legislators to identify for you other legislators who have blocked prior efforts to legislatively repeal these statutes.
- if your Legislators are not fully against the acts of Bill Lee and Jonathan Skrmetti, including their appeal, perhaps you should consider challenging these elected officials in their next primaries or work now to find constitutionally minded stewards to replace the legislators, governors and the attorney general who have failed us.
If you appreciate this effort, this ruling and TFA’s dedication to protecting our rights, please consider joining and supporting TFA by being a member. Further, if you would like to help fund this and other litigation efforts, please consider a tax deductible contribution to the Tennessee Firearms Foundation.
