Nashville, Tenn. – The Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued an opinion in Gary Wygant, et al. v. Bill Lee, Governor, et al., rejecting state constitutional challenges to Tennessee’s redistricting statutes for the state House and Senate.
In February 2022, following the 2020 census, the General Assembly enacted statutes redrawing the voting districts for the state House and Senate. Tennessee voters sued state officials claiming that the House and Senate maps violated the Tennessee Constitution. Gary Wygant, a Gibson County voter, claimed that the House map violated Article II, Section 5 of the Tennessee Constitution by splitting Gibson County into two House districts. And Francie Hunt, a Davidson County voter in Senate District 17, claimed that the Senate map violated Article II, Section 3 of the Tennessee Constitution by not consecutively numbering Davidson County’s four Senate districts.
The State argued that the House and Senate challenges were not justiciable—that is, that Tennessee’s courts could not even hear the challenges. The State argued that Wygant’s challenge to the House map presents a political question and that Wygant had standing to challenge only the split of Gibson County, not the entire House map. The State further argued that Hunt lacked standing to challenge the misnumbering of Davidson County’s Senate districts.
After a trial, a divided three-judge trial court panel held that Wygant’s standing to challenge the House map was limited to the Gibson County split but rejected the State’s other justiciability arguments. On the merits, it rejected Hunt’s district-specific challenge to the House map but agreed with Hunt that the Senate map is unconstitutional.
The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Court agreed that Wygant had standing to challenge the Gibson County split but rejected that challenge on the merits. The Court clarified that a plaintiff bringing a challenge under Article II, Section 5 must prove that the legislature’s decision to split the county was not rationally related to achieving compliance with federal law and held that Wygant had failed to satisfy that standard. The Court held that Hunt lacked standing to challenge the Senate map because she did not suffer an injury in fact. It therefore did not consider Hunt’s challenge on the merits.
Justice Holly Kirby concurred in part and dissented in part. In Justice Kirby’s view, Hunt had standing to challenge the Senate map and should prevail on the merits of that challenge.
Justice Dwight Tarwater also concurred in part and dissented in part. He disagreed with the majority’s conclusion that Wygant had standing to challenge the Gibson County split.
To read the majority opinion in Gary Wygant, et al. v. Bill Lee, Governor, et al., authored by Justice Sarah K. Campbell, and the separate opinions authored by Justice Holly Kirby and Justice Dwight Tarwater, please visit the opinions section of TNCourts.gov.
