Tennesseans must treat HB1971 by Rep. Andrew Farmer  (SB 1958 by Sen. John Stevens) as a serious constitutional threat. This proposal would repeal an existing law that expressly allows citizens to challenge the constitutionality of state statutes BEFORE they are arrested, convicted or otherwise harmed by the state law.  This is not a mere technical procedural revision as Stevens suggested to the Senate Judiciary. 

SB1958/HB1971 dismantles the ability of Tennesseans to file declaratory judgment actions challenging whether state statutes violate the Tennessee or United States Constitutions unless the individual has already suffered damage. More specifically, it removes facial and pre-enforcement challenges to unconstitutional laws that exist under the statute that it repeals.

Declaratory judgment laws have long served as a peaceful, orderly mechanism allowing citizens to ask courts a fundamental question: Is this law constitutional? They permit that question to be asked before a citizen must risk prosecution, penalties, financial loss, or other harm. Eliminating that safeguard alters the balance of power between the government and the governed.

Further, the ability to bring facial and pre-enforcement challenges lies at the very core of our system which is based on three branches of government that are required to operate within limited boundaries of authority.   Under that system, the courts have the duty to determine whether either of the other two branches of government have violated their constitutional limits.  

But, with SB1958/HB1971 the Legislature seeks to change that constitutional balance.  They seek to insulate their unconstitutional actions from citizen inquiries or judicial review.   Curiously, Tennessee's Attorney General, Jonathan Skrmetti is reportedly pushing for this legislation to pass rather than demanding that the constitutional structure and boundaries of power be protected. 

On February 17, the Senate Judiciary failed to move SB1958 out of committee.  It stayed there on a vote where 4 Republicans voted to move forward with it, 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted against it and then one Republican refused to vote.  That Republican?  Senator Kerry Roberts.  Had he voted against it, the bill would have truly been defeated.   Instead, he and a sufficient number of other committee Republicans have now signed a letter at the request of Senator Stevens to put SB1958 back on the calendar for another vote. 

When the Senate bill stalled on February 17, the House bill was set for February 18.  It was then reset to March 11.  But, on February 25, the Legislative website was updated at the last minute to reset HB1971 for Wednesday, March 4.  

Resetting HB1971 to be heard in less than a week likely is an attempt to pass it out of the House Judiciary before Tennesseans can be heard. Just more shenanigans by Republican legislators who are intent on taking away your right to bring these important challenges to unconstitutional state laws. 

Tennesseans must understand that constitutional governance depends on friction between branches — not insulation from review. Legislators swear to uphold the Constitution but frequently do not. Courts exist to interpret the Constitution but not to make policy. Citizens retain the sovereign right to invoke judicial review when they believe constitutional boundaries have been crossed. 

Any legislation, such as SB1958/HB1971, that seeks to shield statutes from scrutiny, delaying review until after harm occurs, or narrowing access to the courts must trigger immediate civic engagement and outrage directed at the public officials who so brazenly seek to “defend the king” against the actual sovereignty of the people.

This is the moment for vigilance, not passivity. Contact your legislators. Demand clear explanations of what SB1958/HB1971 changes and why. Ask specifically whether it limits pre-enforcement constitutional challenges. Ask who requested it. Ask how citizens are expected to protect their rights the Legislature bans declaratory remedies. Attend hearings. Inform neighbors. Engage local media. Constitutional accountability rarely erodes through dramatic declarations — it more often contracts quietly through procedural revisions that escape widespread attention.

Contact every member of the House Judiciary Committee and demand that the committee vote against this bill.

Andrew Farmer (Chair & Bill Sponsor) rep.andrew.farmer@capitol.tn.gov

Elaine David (Vice-Chair) rep.elaine.davis@capitol.tn.gov

Rebecca Alexander rep.rebecca.alexander@capitol.tn.gov

Fred Atchley rep.fred.atchley@capitol.tn.gov

Gino Bulso rep.gino.bulso@capitol.tn.gov

Clay Doggett rep.clay.doggett@capitol.tn.gov

Rick Eldridge rep.rick.eldridge@capitol.tn.gov

Johnny Garrett rep.johnny.garrett@capitol.tn.gov

G. A. Hardaway rep.ga.hardaway@capitol.tn.gov

Torrey Harris  rep.torrey.harris@capitol.tn.gov

Gloria Johnson rep.gloria.johnson@capitol.tn.gov

Kelly Keisling rep.kelly.keisling@capitol.tn.gov

William Lamberth rep.william.lamberth@capitol.tn.gov

Mary Littleton rep.mary.littleton@capitol.tn.gov

Jason Powell rep.jason.powell@capitol.tn.gov

Lowell Russell rep.lowell.russell@capitol.tn.gov

Gabby Salinas rep.gabby.salinas@capitol.tn.gov

Rick Scarbrough rep.rick.scarbrough@capitol.tn.gov

Tom Stinnett rep.tom.stinnett@capitol.tn.gov

Chris Todd rep.chris.todd@capitol.tn.gov

Joe Towns Jr rep.joe.towns@capitol.tn.gov

Ron Travis rep.ron.travis@capitol.tn.gov

(rep.andrew.farmer@capitol.tn.gov; rep.elaine.davis@capitol.tn.gov; rep.rebecca.alexander@capitol.tn.gov; rep.fred.atchley@capitol.tn.gov; rep.gino.bulso@capitol.tn.gov; rep.clay.doggett@capitol.tn.gov; rep.rick.eldridge@capitol.tn.gov; rep.johnny.garrett@capitol.tn.gov; rep.ga.hardaway@capitol.tn.gov; rep.torrey.harris@capitol.tn.gov; rep.gloria.johnson@capitol.tn.gov; rep.kelly.keisling@capitol.tn.gov; rep.william.lamberth@capitol.tn.gov; rep.mary.littleton@capitol.tn.gov; rep.jason.powell@capitol.tn.gov; rep.lowell.russell@capitol.tn.gov; rep.gabby.salinas@capitol.tn.gov; rep.rick.scarbrough@capitol.tn.gov; rep.tom.stinnett@capitol.tn.gov; rep.chris.todd@capitol.tn.gov; rep.joe.towns@capitol.tn.gov; rep.ron.travis@capitol.tn.gov )

Grassroots Engagement

Some citizens are seasoned defenders of their rights and others might be more closely aligned with the “sleeping giant” that has not yet become aware that some of Tennessee’s Legislators and perhaps its Attorney General are attempting to take from them the fundamental tool of access to the courts.

Here are some suggested approaches to phone calls and emails that you can modify and adopt to your needs:

Legislator Phone Call (sample – edit to your preference)

Hello, my name is ___, and I’m a constituent from ___ (city/zip). I’m calling to express my strong opposition to Senate Bill 1958 by John Stevens and House Bill 1971 by Andrew Farmer which is set to be heard on March 4.

These bills seek to block Tennesseans’ ability to bring declaratory judgment actions to challenge whether a state statute violates the Tennessee or United States Constitutions. Declaratory judgment procedures are a long-standing safeguard that allow citizens to seek judicial review before risking penalties or enforcement harm.

Please let the Senator/Representative (or Judiciary Committee member) know that I oppose strongly this legislation.

I respectfully ask:

Thank you for your time. I would appreciate a response outlining the member’s position.

Short Voicemail Version (sample – edit to your preference)

Hello, this is ___ from ___ (zip). I’m calling to urge opposition to SB1958/HB1971. Declaratory judgment actions allow citizens to challenge potentially unconstitutional statutes before suffering harm. I oppose this legislation and am requesting that my legislator (or that this Judiciary Committee member) contact me to state their position. Thank you.

Legislator Email Script (sample – edit to your preference)

Subject: Please Oppose SB1958/HB1971 – Protect My Rights to Judicial Review

Dear Senator/Representative ___,

I am a constituent from ___, and I am writing to express strong opposition to Senate Bill 1958 / House Bill 1971 which is set in House Judiciary for March 4.

This legislation removes Tennesseans’ ability to file declaratory judgment actions challenging whether state statutes violate constitutional limits. Declaratory judgment procedures are not technicalities; they are essential mechanisms that allow citizens to seek judicial review without first risking prosecution, penalties, or financial harm.

Limiting pre-enforcement constitutional challenges raises serious concerns about:

• Citizens’ practical ability to protect constitutional rights
• The judiciary’s role in interpreting constitutional boundaries
• The balance of powers among branches of government

I respectfully request:

Regardless of party affiliation, Tennesseans benefit from transparent laws that preserve access to judicial review and constitutional accountability.

Thank you for your service and your attention to this matter. I look forward to your detailed response.