Chattanooga Will Have A Recall Election

After certifying the petitions to Recall Mayor Ron Littlefield, the Hamilton County Election Commission (HCEC), in accordance with Tennessee State Law, affixed the date of the Recall Election to the next local General Election on August 2 2012. This means that all interested parties can pick up papers to file for candidacy on January 6 2012 and the qualifying deadline is April 5 2012. An election calendar is available from the HCEC here.

In August we will be voting for someone to fulfill Mayor Littlefield's term (and Littlefield can, of course, run for election to finish out his term).

Why am I so certain that this election will now commence? Because the Attorney General has several responses to potential legal strategies for blocking the election. Let's take a look at the Attorney General's opinion in relation to case law:

Roberts v. Brown, 43 Tenn. App. 567, 310 S.W.2d 197 (1957), p.t.a. denied (1958)
The Attorney General cited this case as stating:

In Roberts, the Court found that a city official could not challenge the constitutional validity of the very charter under which he had accepted office. 

State ex rel. Hammond v. Wimberly, 184 Tenn. 132, 196 S.W.2d 561 (Tenn. 1946)
The Attorney General cites this case saying that in this action:

the Tennessee Supreme Court refused to issue an injunction to restrain the Knox County Election Commission from conducting a recall election in Knoxville. The plaintiffs in the action claimed that the election commissioners had failed adequately to perform several functions with regard to the recall petition, including removing defective pages and signatures. The Court found that courts of equity in Tennessee ordinarily will not enjoin the holding of an election. The Court noted, further, that at least some of the duties were discretionary and that the commissioners were the proper judges of the sufficiency of the recall petition. The Court declined, therefore, to review the commissioners’ certification.
Depending on the particular charter provision involved, a court could reach a similar conclusion with regard to any lawsuit challenging the decision of a county election commission to place a recall issue on the ballot. Further, under Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-11-202(a)(4), the Coordinator of Elections must “[a]uthoritatively interpret the election laws for all persons administering them.” (Emphasis added). Where the Coordinator is made a party to a lawsuit challenging a recall petition, a court is likely to defer to that official’s interpretation of the requirements for the petition.

So what is decided by this case law is that:

1. Elected officials may not challenge the constitutionality of the very charters through which they are empowered to be elected.
2. Under questions of the validity of signatures and proper interpretation of the law for recall, the proper authority is the County Election Commission and the Courts have set precedent in deferring to their authority.

What if an elected official that is subject to a recall brings about a challenge to the City Charter claiming that it is superseded by State Law?

Here the Attorney General is less certain on what a Court would potentially rule:

we think a court would conclude that a city official is not estopped from asserting a claim that the recall provision in the city charter is superseded by general state law. As discussed above, however, it is not clear whether a Tennessee court would find that an official has standing to challenge the decision of a county election commission to place a recall issue on the ballot.

I strongly believe that, based on the case law and precedent of the Tennessee Supreme Court, lower court judges would be unlikely to find Littlefield to have standing to challenge and stop an election certified by the Election Commission. The Supreme Court has long upheld the authority of Election Commissioners are the proper judges of the sufficiency of recall petitions - the Chancery and Circuit Courts of Hamilton County will likely follow this pattern.

On a side note
Initiative, Referendum and Recall are all three forms of Direct Democracy that were introduced into state constitutions and municipal charters during the progressive era for the purpose of creating greater accountability in politics and creating democratic mechanisms through which ordinary, everyday citizens might organize to combat machine politics. The Recall of Mayor Ron Littlefield has created a historical precedent for the power of grassroots organizing to bring about structural change through the powers afforded us by the Chattanooga City Charter.