NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Two well-known Knoxvillians revived a lawsuit on Wednesday challenging two sections of state voter law, including one that now requires signs to be posted at polling places telling voters they need to be "bona fide" party members.
The lawsuit was originally filed in 2023 and was dismissed in March 2024 after a Nashville judge ruled in favor of Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett. The judge dismissed the lawsuit due to a lack of standing, which meant the plaintiffs were unable to show they were directly hurt by the law.
Victor Ashe, a longtime Republican and the former mayor of Knoxville, and Phil Lawson, a longtime Democrat and businessman, originally filed the lawsuit in 2023. They were joined the League of Women Voters of Tennessee in hopes the laws would be declared unconstitutional and for a judge to say the laws violated their First Amendment rights.
On Wednesday, Ashe and Lawson revived the lawsuit and filed a revised version that included two new plaintiffs they believe will resolve the issue of standing. The revised lawsuit names Phillip Lawson, a Knox County real estate developer and Democrat who has served on several local nonprofit boards, and Gabe Hart, a Madison County educator and op-ed writer for the Tennessee Lookout who publicly documented being challenged and intimidated for voting in a Republican primary in Tennessee as a progressive.
"I was disappointed when our case was initially dismissed for lack of standing,” Ashe said. “Now that the Tennessee presidential primary has occurred, and we know of individuals who did not exercise their right to vote because of this law, I'm hopeful the court will hear the merits of this case. Since the primary vote, we also witnessed actions taken by the Republican State Executive Committee to remove from the ballot-qualified Republican candidates and popularly elected delegates to the Republican Party convention based upon this vague and confusing definition of a “bona fide” Republican voter. These actions are fundamentally wrong and contrary to democratic principles.”
The lawsuit challenges two portions of state voting law. One section has not been enforced and requires voters to declare party affiliation or show "bona fides" to vote in a primary election. Another section was recently added to state law that requires signs to be posted at all polling places to warn voters they could be prosecuted for not showing their "bona fide" party affiliation.
Voters are not required to register with a party to vote in a primary election in Tennessee. Instead, they need to ask for either a Republican or Democrat ballot at their polling location. The judge's opinion said there have been no "known prosecutions under (the law) in the roughly 50 years since it became law." However, the lawsuit contended that the recently implemented signage section at a minimum constitutes intimidation and would deter people from voting in primary elections.
After the March 2024 primary elections, the plaintiffs said they saw voters harmed by the election law.
Hart said that while he hadn't been prosecuted, he did face threats of reprisal and intimidation after voting in a Republican primary in 2022 as a progressive.
"District Attorney Pickens informed Mr. Hart that he could be prosecuted for voting in the Republican primary and told him, 'There’s heat on me to prosecute you.' Tennessee Representative Chris Todd referred to Mr. Hart as a “felon” while messaging a constituent," the lawsuit said.
Hart said these experiences made him reasonably afraid of being prosecuted for voting in the 2024 primary.
Lawson said he has voted for both Democratic and Republican candidates in general elections and has donated to candidates in both parties over the years. He said he chose not to vote in Democratic or Republican presidential primaries in March because he could not consider himself a "bona fide" member of either party and was concerned he could face prosecution for not declaring allegiance to a party.
State law requires signs to be posted at polling places that say it's a violation of state law for a person to vote "in a political party's primary without being a bona fide member of or affiliated with that political party, or to declare allegiance to that party without the intent to affiliate with that party."
In the lawsuit, the League argued that the laws prevented it from educating voters because it could not accurately tell people about voting issues related to the primaries while the laws were in effect. In the judge's opinion back in March, he said the League's mission wasn't to offer legal advice, but instead, its mission was "providing voter information" to "empower voters and defend democracy."
"The enforcement of (the law) does not 'perceptibly impair' this mission," the opinion said. "For example, the League can still encourage voters to register to vote in both primary and general elections. The League can also educate voters about the various issues that might impact them or their community by, for example, urging potential voters to elect representatives that will address what Plaintiffs perceive to be a vague law."
The judge's opinion also said the League did not adequately explain "why a law that has been on the books for over 50 years is likely to suddenly confuse or intimidate voters." The League pointed to a speech by Hargett as an example of a "threat of prosecution." In it, he said the District Attorney could prosecute people if they vote in a party's primary election without being a member of that party.
"Laws like this are a recipe for confusion and have resulted in voters choosing not to participate," said Celina Stewart, chief counsel at the League of Women Voters of the US. "Instead of creating laws that confuse and discourage voters, lawmakers should prioritize their efforts on clear election laws that make voting easy and accessible."
Hart said in the lawsuit Hargett visited Madison County and openly discussed the possibility of prosecuting anyone who “crossed over” to vote in the primary.
The judge said in the speech, the Secretary of State was describing an "undeniably true statement" about the state's law instead of threatening to prosecute voters if they aren't members of a political party. The judge's opinion also found that Ashe and Lawson could not show they had been really hurt by the laws or enforcement of the laws, and neither could the League of Women Voters.
"The League 'cannot manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves based on their fears of a hypothetical future harm that is not certainly impending,'" the opinion said.
The revised lawsuit is asking the court to throw out the laws regarding polling place signs and 'bona fide' party membership in Tennessee for being overly broad, vague and unconstitutional.