Thu
May 24 2012
11:45 am
BREAKING: Breeding disqualified
By: R. Neal

The court ruled today that Shelley Breeding is not qualified to be on the ballot for state House, scoring another big win for the Tennessee Republican racket protection and voter disenfranchisement machine. The judge said she failed to prove her case.

Developing...

UPDATE: The declaratory judgement...

"It does not work the way Ms. Breeding wants: i.e.: the candidate is qualified until the election commission proves otherwise. Thus, Ms. Breeding would have to show that she was a resident of Knox County. It is her duty to show she is qualified. She has failed to prove such."

Also:

"The court compliments Ms. Breeding on her distinguished career to date, She obviously is very active in her political and civic endeavors, She is the type person who makes a good public servant because of their work ethic and involvement in society. Although the court's knowledge is based only upon the court record, it would appear to be a mischaracterization for anyone to use the term 'voter fraud' in Ms. Breeding's case."

Topics:
reform4's picture

Shelly can get on Anderson Co ballot...

Submitted by reform4 on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 12:39pm.

... then when AC rejects her because she voted in Knox Co, she can sue both for civil rights violations.

rikki's picture

That's a disgraceful decision

Submitted by rikki on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 1:09pm.

That's a disgraceful decision that serves only to disempower citizens and strengthen government authority. Chancellor Brown has weakened democracy and freedom with this unprincipled decision.
TCA 2-2-122(b) provides a simple remedy for cases where residency is ambiguous: it defers the power to citizens, allowing them a one-time choice in which county to establish residence. Despite rambling on for 47 pages, the judge never mentions that citizens are thus empowered. Instead, he dismisses section (b) outright because "the decision is much easier to make than if all the factors of 2-2-122(b) have to be considered."
He has just stripped citizens of power for the sake of convenience of a government authority. This is a proud day for those who wish to curtail freedom and constrain democracy.

reform4's picture

Democracy is hard.

Submitted by reform4 on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 2:39pm.

Although, I think what he was saying is that some of the criteria are easily changed (car registration, etc), while moving a house is harder if a citizen wanted to 'game the system'. However, in this case, there's no evidence Breeding is conveniently picking a venue to run in- she's been voting in Knox County for several elections.

It's not like, oh, Dick Cheney buying a house in Wyoming to avoid the Constitutional limitation that the President and VP could not be from the same state (Texas). That, of course, was perfectly legal, although it was clear Wyoming was not his primary residence.

RTKnox's picture

Heard she has already appealed

Submitted by RTKnox (not verified) on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 2:19pm.

Rikki -- I could not agree more. Breeding has already appealed. Surely, the appellate court will find a citizen's rights trumps the convenience of the government authorities. It is easier to take one's rights away than provide a fair hearing looking at all the relevant factors.

JohnB's picture

Shelley Breeding's Disfranchisement

Submitted by JohnB (not verified) on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 2:30pm.

This is a breath-taking abuse of judicial power -- How could Ms. Breeding serve on the jury in Knox County, and secondly, and vote there, if she is not a resident? It seems like the latter fact means the Knox County Commission has repeatedly recorded Ms. Breeding as a resident.

50 cents wasted's picture

Seems like a well reasoned and well thought out opinion

Submitted by 50 cents wasted (not verified) on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 7:03pm.

Looks like Battling Billy Stokes is letting another person in the office do all of the talking, he may have lost interest in the case already.

Knox County juries are pulled from the drivers license database and the drivers license is not based on a domicile, it's based on a street address. Sevier County and Blount County pull their jury pools from voter registration records.

Being a voter, a driver, a juror, and a candidate for the state legislature are all different animals and because one is Knox County oriented doesn't mean all of them are Knox County oriented.

The house district across the line where the residence is located in is the 33rd, currently occupied by Ragan from Oak Ridge. Retired Air Force Republican and I wouldn't want to run again that either, making an open and newly created district much, much more appealing. Reading the judge's ruling, she's not qualified not because of who she is, what she does, or how she spends her time or money, it's because of where she lives. Pretty simple.

In my opinion, we've got enough lawyers in the legislature, I'd take 1 level headed machine shop owner or a longtime farmer over 6 lawyers in the legislature any day of the week.

Time to move on.

rikki's picture

If it were well reasoned, it

Submitted by rikki on Thu, 2012/05/24 - 7:28pm.

If it were well reasoned, it would have addressed the remedy the law provides for situations like this and explained why it does not apply. Instead, the judge included only the portions of 2-2-122(b) that do not mention the one-time election of residency and omitted the topic. The weak justification for discarding that portion of the law and the careful omission of the existing remedy make this decision the definition of judicial activism.

billy's picture

What are you talking about?

Submitted by billy (not verified) on Mon, 2012/05/28 - 11:27pm.

I am quoting TCA 2-2-122(b) in its entirety. Where is this "one time election " you keep talking about?

(b) (1) The following factors, among other relevant matters, may be considered in the determination of where a person is a resident:

(A) The person's possession, acquisition or surrender of inhabitable property;

(B) Location of the person's occupation;

(C) Place of licensing or registration of the person's personal property;

(D) Place of payment of taxes which are governed by residence;

(E) Purpose of the person's presence in a particular place; and

(F) Place of the person's licensing for activities such as driving.

Perhaps you are referring to 2-2-122(d). quoted below:

(d) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision in this chapter to the contrary, a person shall be eligible to register to vote in the county where the person pays property taxes on the person's primary residence even though the property is partially or totally located in another county, but the only access to the property is through the county where the person pays property taxes. Any person residing at such property shall make a one-time election to register to vote in either the county where the property taxes are paid or the county where the property is located.

You should take note that it refers to registering to vote (the chancellor referenced this).

Go back to law school and pay attention this time.

rikki's picture

good catch

Submitted by rikki on Mon, 2012/05/28 - 11:55pm.

Yes, that part of (d) as well as other parts of 2-2-122 resolve ambiguous cases by letting the citizen make a one-time election. My error was including (b) when I meant to refer to the entirety of the law. Thank you for catching my error. This error does not, however, change my position.

The law prescribes the same remedy for every case of ambiguity: citizen choice. The judge has prescribed election-commission choice. Chancellor Brown's decision must be appealed; it is an injustice. Anyone who favors freedom would want a citizen to choose which county is his or her political home. Are you in favor of letting the government decide?

billy's picture

No - I didn't say that. I

Submitted by billy (not verified) on Tue, 2012/05/29 - 10:17am.

No - I didn't say that. I thought it was the right ruling.

R. Neal's picture

Shelley Breeding to carry bid

Submitted by R. Neal on Fri, 2012/05/25 - 7:52am.

Shelley Breeding to carry bid for House seat to state Supreme Court

Bbeanster's picture

Cool lede, Balloch!

Submitted by Bbeanster on Fri, 2012/05/25 - 1:59pm.

Cool lede, Balloch!

bluetick56's picture

Karma

Submitted by bluetick56 on Fri, 2012/05/25 - 1:55pm.

If only Ms. Breeding would be called to jury duty in the case of a Knox County Commissioner arrested for indecent exposure.

Ah well. I suppose a misdemeanor wouldn't warrant a jury.

{/fantasy}

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives