On March 31st, Williamson County Republican Party Chairman Steve Hickey reached out to the Senate State & Local Government Committee asking them to vote NO on Senate Bill 0799. By permission, Hickey’s email is printed verbatim below.
Chairman Briggs & respected members of the State & Local Government Committee,
I’m Steve Hickey, recently elected chairman of the Williamson County Republican Party. I am writing to urge you to vote NO on SB799 due to amended language introduced in the companion HB855 that renders this proposed legislation constitutionally problematic.
On March 25th, Rep Lee Reeves (TN-65) introduced an amendment to HB855 that would prohibit county political parties from conducting nominations other than by primary. Counties which have conducted nominations other than by primary for the past two election cycles (2022 & 2024) would be temporarily grandfathered.
At the heart of this issue is the desire by local parties to ensure local general election nominees are selected by those affiliated with and holding allegiance to that party. While the Tennessee Constitution holds that local governments are extensions of the state government and thus only have powers delegated to them by the state, it does not specifically grant power over private organizations, such as political parties. State intrusion into this private matter would thus appear arbitrary and a contradiction of the Tennessee Constitution, Article I, Section 1–all power is inherent in the people. Furthermore, there is case law indicating this is a serious overreach of state power bordering on unconstitutional.
The 1986 SCOTUS ruling on Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut upheld political parties’ First Amendment protections on assembly when considering membership and methods for choosing nominees. Of note, the Tashjian ruling explicitly stated allowing unaffiliated voters to participate in the Republican Primary violated the Republican Party’s First Amendment rights. As the amendment to HB885 provides no vehicle for me as a party chairman to ensure only Republicans are voting in our local primary, it is in direct contradiction to the Tashjian ruling.
Similarly, the 2000 SCOTUS ruling on California Democratic Party v. Jones again reinforced a political party’s First Amendment association protections. The underlying issue was California Proposition 198 that changed primaries from closed to effectively open affairs where voters could choose candidates from political parties opposite that of their allegiance. In his 7-2 majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:
“Proposition 198 forces political parties to associate with—to have their nominees, and hence their positions, determined by—those who, at best, have refused to affiliate with the party, and, at worst, have expressly affiliated with a rival.”
The amendment to HB885 would similarly hamstring local party officials. Preventing any alternative to a political party’s freedom to have its nominees selected only by those who have chosen to associate with and bear allegiance to that party is a violation of that party’s First Amendment association rights.
In closing, I am fully aware of the political motivations behind this effort to constrain local political parties, specifically mine. However, I would ask you each to consider the ramifications of and precedent this action would set. Do we really want our legislature to force private organizations to accede to state power in their internal affairs, even if we believe there is some purported good? Do we want our legislature dictating membership requirements or acceptable views on issues for a private entity, even if doing so would somehow yield a result which we favor? The suggestion that the state intrude on this private matter should give us all pause as we reflect upon the dangerous blurring of lines between state and private. This is an issue for political parties to determine as private organizations, not an issue for which the legislature to dictate a solution. I thus strongly encourage you to vote NO on SB799.
Very Respectfully,
Stephen J. Hickey
Chairman, Williamson County Republican Party
Franklin, TN
One Response
Thanx!
Briggs’ response to me;
Richard Briggs
To: me
·
Mon, Mar 31 at 7:35 PM
Message Body
The bill has nothing to do with the election of party officers.
I’m not sure you read the amendment correctly. The required primary elections as stated in the amendment are limited to:
A) Governor
B) Members of the General Assembly
C) United States Senator
D) Members of the United States House of Representatives
Section 2.
1) Statewide political parties may nominate their candidates for another office other than those requires by TCA 2-13-202 to be nominated in a primary election by any method authorized under the rules of the party or by primary election under this title.
Richard M. Briggs, MD
State Senator, Knoxville
Chairman, Senate State & Local Government Committee
Colonel U.S. Army (retired)
Office Address:
425 Rep. John Lewis Way North
774 Cordell Hull Bldg.
Nashville, Tennessee 37243