Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Tennessee Senate panel hears sharply divided legal arguments on proposed 'nullification' process bill
Summary
A Tennessee Senate summer-study hearing drew competing constitutional testimony about SB 2775/SB 1092: outside scholars urged codifying a state nullification process to resist perceived federal overreach, while other lawyers warned the approach is constitutionally unsound and could create legal chaos. Committee members probed practical consequences, including federal funding and disaster response; no vote was taken.
A Tennessee Senate committee convened a summer-study hearing to examine the legal theory and draft mechanics behind proposals labeled in testimony as SB 2775 and SB 1092, drawing sharply divided testimony from outside constitutional scholars and lawyers.
The committee’s chair opened the session by saying the meeting was informational and that "we're not gonna be voting on anything," then introduced two witnesses who presented opposing views. Jeff Cobble, an attorney who described himself as a constitutional scholar, argued for a textualist reading of the U.S. Constitution and said powers not delegated to Congress remain with the states and the people. "When statutory language is clear … we must apply its plain meaning," Cobble told senators, framing nullification as a lawful remedy when federal action exceeds Article I, Section 8 authorities.
Joe Wolverton, a second proponent, urged the panel to adopt a statutory process that would allow states and localities to challenge and refuse to enforce federal actions they deem unconstitutional.…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
