Connect with us

Tennessee

Tennessee will not appeal ruling over wildlife agents planting cameras

Published

on

Tennessee will not appeal ruling over wildlife agents planting cameras


In May, the Tennessee Court of Appeals ruled against the state after wildlife agents trespassed onto private land and planted cameras to look for hunting violations. This week, the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office declined to file an appeal, meaning the ruling is affirmed. It’s a good first step in reclaiming Americans’ property rights.

State law allows officers of the Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency (TWRA)—or any other state or federal wildlife agency—to “go upon any property, outside of buildings, posted or otherwise,” in order to “enforce all laws relating to wildlife.” As Reason first reported in 2022, TWRA agents interpreted this directive to trespass onto private lands at will; in at least two cases, agents then coordinated with federal wildlife officers to plant trail cameras without a warrant and without the property owner’s knowledge or permission. One man who found a camera on his land took it down, at which point agents raided his home and arrested him for “stolen government property.”

Under Supreme Court precedent dating back to a century-old Prohibition case, “open fields” do not receive the same constitutional protections as a person’s home and the “curtilage,” the area immediately around the home. In Hester v. United States (1924), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that “the protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers, and effects,’ does not extend to open fields.”

The two Tennessean property owners sued in 2022, claiming that the state law violated the Tennessee Constitution. Article I, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution uses very similar language to the Fourth Amendment—only swapping out “effects” with “possessions”—but goes even further, adding “that general warrants, whereby an officer may be commanded to search suspected places, without evidence of the fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, whose offences are not particularly described and supported by evidence, are dangerous to liberty and ought not be granted.”

Advertisement

The district court agreed, finding that “Tennessee’s prohibition on unreasonable searches offers a broader guarantee of security for an individual’s real property than its federal counterpart.”

The state appealed the ruling, and in May 2024, the Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling. While the appeals court stopped short of finding the state law unconstitutional, as the district court had done, it nonetheless found the TWRA’s application of it “a disturbing assertion of power on behalf of the government that stands contrary to the foundations of the search protections against arbitrary governmental intrusions in the American legal tradition, generally, and in Tennessee, specifically.”

To appeal a judgment to the state supreme court, Tennessee code provides “60 days after the entry of the judgment.” The deadline for the state to appeal the decision in this case passed on July 9. (The Tennessee Attorney General’s office did not respond to Reason‘s request for comment.) As a result, the decision is now settled law in the state, although a separate case could make its way to the state supreme court in the future.

The ruling is great news for Tennesseans, as is the state’s decision to let it stand. It provides further protection against unwarranted intrusion and surveillance at the hands of government agents. But it’s only the first step in undoing a century of harmful jurisprudence.

After all, the ruling only applies to the state constitution, leaving the open fields doctrine untouched. As a result, any federal wildlife agent is still free to come onto your land with impunity and even plant cameras at will, so long as they keep a distance from your home.

Advertisement

The practice also varies by state law. As Reason documented in 2022, some states will only plant cameras on private property with a warrant or the owner’s permission, while others claim free rein to come onto private land and place cameras.

All is not lost: Tennessee joins several other states that have affirmed greater privacy protections than the Fourth Amendment allows. As far back as 1970, the Mississippi Supreme Court decided in Davidson v. State, “This right to be secure from invasions of privacy by government officials is a basic freedom in our Federal and State constitutional systems.” In 2018, the Vermont Supreme Court affirmed in State v. Dupuis that “Vermont’s Constitution establishes greater protection against search and seizure of ‘open fields’ than the U.S. Constitution, requiring that law enforcement officers secure warrants before searching open fields when the landowner demonstrates an expectation of privacy.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Tennessee

Ex-Tennessee Titans star had CTE at time of death, researchers confirm

Published

on

Ex-Tennessee Titans star had CTE at time of death, researchers confirm


Former Tennessee Titans star Frank Wycheck had stage III CTE when he died at age 52 at his home in Tennessee on Dec. 9, 2023, his family said Thursday.

CTE – chronic traumatic encephalopathy – is a degenerative brain disorder that happens due to repeated head impacts, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

Wycheck, an 11-year NFL veteran tight end, died after an apparent fall at his home in Chattanooga. His brain was studied by researchers at Boston University’s Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy Center, which confirmed he had stage III CTE, one below stage IV, the most severe diagnosis.

“We witnessed our father becoming increasingly isolated and experiencing drastic mood swings. He became more impulsive, and often inconsistent and undependable,” Wycheck’s daughter, Deanna Wycheck Szabo, said in a statement. “Now in hindsight, I understand that he was suffering from the symptoms of CTE due to the repeated trauma his brain and body endured over 11 seasons in the NFL.”

Advertisement

The Wycheck family issued support for continued research and education around CTE for NFL players and their families.

“Our family is grateful to learn of his confirmed CTE diagnosis in hopes to continue our father’s desire to bring awareness, increased intervention, education, and support for NFL alumni and their families related to CTE,” Wycheck Szabo said. “Our hope is that NFL alumni, who believe they are suffering from CTE, will be given the much-needed resources and guidance prior to their symptoms reaching a debilitating state. With on-going CTE research and diagnosis’, we hope future NFL alumni and families will be explicitly given an outline and plan of action in receiving care and treatment.”

Prior to his death, Wycheck was also an advocate for CTE research, even noting he believed he suffered from the disease.

“Some people have heads made of concrete, and it doesn’t really affect some of those guys,” he told researchers in 2017, per AP. “But CTE is real. I know I’m suffering through it, and it’s been a struggle and I feel for all the guys out there that are going through this.”

Wycheck was a three-time NFL Pro Bowl selection across 11 seasons for the Titans, Houston Oilers and Washington. He finished his NFL career with 505 receptions for 5,126 yards and 28 touchdowns in 155 games, including 135 starts.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Tennessee

Tennessee Muddies Up Its Execution Manual

Published

on

Tennessee Muddies Up Its Execution Manual


Tennessee on Thursday released a redacted version of its new execution manual, blacking out sporadic titles and team names throughout the trimmed-down document that now provides vague guidelines and omits previously detailed steps on carrying out the death penalty. The Department of Correction initially would not hand over the manual when pressed by the AP, arguing that the government had to keep the entire manual secret to protect the identities of the executioner and other people involved. On Thursday, the agency reversed course and provided the AP with a copy of the lethal injection protocol.

The 44-page manual is noticeably shorter than the 2018 version the state had been operating under, which contained nearly 100 pages, including 11 detailing how lethal injection drugs should be procured, stored, and administered. The failure to follow those procedures forced Republican Gov. Bill Lee in 2022 to call a last-minute halt to the execution of Oscar Smith and place a moratorium on new executions while the process was under review. An independent report later found that none of the drugs prepared for the seven people executed since 2018 had been fully tested as required by the manual. The report also revealed that officials considered trying to acquire drugs through a veterinarian or even importing them internationally. Later, the state Attorney General’s Office conceded in court that two of the people most responsible for overseeing the drugs “incorrectly testified” that they were being tested as required.

Advertisement

The new manual contains a single page on the lethal injection chemicals with no specific directions for testing them. It removes a requirement that the drugs come from a licensed pharmacist, per the AP. Yet the new protocol has several additions, including now authorizing the state to deviate from the protocol whenever the correction commissioner deems it necessary. The 2018 protocol required a series of three drugs administered in sequence; the version unveiled last week requires a single dose of pentobarbital. And the people most responsible for carrying out the execution will now be outside contractors. The manual requires an IV team and a physician who are not Department of Correction personnel.

(More death penalty stories.)





Source link

Continue Reading

Tennessee

Judge axes Biden Title IX rule against transgender discrimination after Tenn., other states sue

Published

on

Judge axes Biden Title IX rule against transgender discrimination after Tenn., other states sue


play

Rules created by the Biden administration prohibiting schools and universities from discriminating against transgender students were struck down in a Thursday court ruling that applies nationwide.

Tennessee was one of six states that sued to block the rules from going into effect.

Advertisement

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti called the ruling “a huge win for Tennessee, for common sense, and for women and girls across America.”

“The court’s ruling is yet another repudiation of the Biden administration’s relentless push to impose a radical gender ideology through unconstitutional and illegal rulemaking,” Skrmetti said in a statement. “Because the Biden rule is vacated altogether, President Trump will be free to take a fresh look at our Title IX regulations when he returns to office next week.”

The regulations, which had already been blocked from implementation by a preliminary order, were released by the U.S. Department of Education in April as part of the Biden administration’s interpretation of Title IX, a federal law that bars discrimination on the basis of sex in schools that receive federal funding. The new regulations expanded the umbrella of sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of “sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics.”

Under the updated rules, a school would violate the law if it “denies a transgender student access to a sex-separate facility or activity consistent with that of a student’s gender identity.”

Advertisement

The judge who issued the ruling, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky Chief Judge Danny C. Reeves, pulled few punches in his opinion, calling the updated interpretation “unlawful on numerous fronts” and saying the new rules had an “arbitrary nature.”

Reeves saw the updated regulations as a departure from Title IX’s original purpose and longstanding interpretation, writing “Title IX does not encompass the issue of gender identity at all.”

“Put simply, there is nothing in the text or statutory design of Title IX to suggest that discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ means anything other than it has since Title IX’s inception—that recipients of federal funds under Title IX may not treat a person worse than another similarly-situated individual on the basis of the person’s sex, i.e., male or female,” Reeves wrote.

Reeves claimed, despite the U.S. Department of Education’s statements in court to the contrary, that the rules would “require Title IX recipients, including teachers, to use names and pronouns associated with a student’s asserted gender identity,” a flashpoint in the ongoing culture war around LGBTQ+ people, youth in particular.

Advertisement

“President Biden’s radical Title IX rewrite is dead and common sense is ALIVE!” Skrmetti wrote on the social media site X, responding to a post from conservative media personality Clay Travis.

While the protections for gender identity discrimination are the most politically charged, Reeves’ order tosses out the updated regulations in their entirety. The rules made other changes to Title IX, including the system for handling sexual assault complaints, for example.

Shiwali Patel, an attorney in the Obama administration’s Office for Civil Rights who resigned from the Education Department in Trump’s first term, called the judge’s decision Thursday a “huge setback” that will ultimately harm students.

“I hope that they will continue to try to fight back,” she said of the Biden team. “But the reality is that there really isn’t much time for it left.”

The Department of Education did not immediately provide a comment.

Advertisement

Zachary Schermele of USA TODAY contributed to this report.

Evan Mealins is the justice reporter for The Tennessean. Contact him at emealins@gannett.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending