logo
A bill to preempt Metro Council by a Nashville Democrat raises eyebrows

A bill to preempt Metro Council by a Nashville Democrat raises eyebrows

Yahoo24-02-2025

(Photo: Metro Nashville Police)
The recent introduction — and rapid withdrawal — of legislation to eliminate local authority over police surveillance cameras by a Democratic lawmaker in the state legislature has raised eyebrows in Nashville.
State Rep. John Ray Clemmons, a Nashville Democrat, introduced a bill that would effectively gut local oversight of controversial surveillance technology like license plate readers (LPRs) — automated cameras that capture and analyze images of vehicle license plates.
Nashville's Metro Council spent nearly two years debating LPR regulations. The prolonged debate, which included a series of community meetings and a six-month pilot program in 2023, resulted in a regulatory framework limiting local police use of the cameras and requiring the department to delete all data after 10 days.
LPRs remain a divisive issue in the city. The Metro Nashville Police Department has yet to present any vendor contracts for the council's approval, the last step that's needed to deploy the cameras countywide.
I don't know where Clemmons lives, but I'd have to assume it's somewhere under a rock. That's where you'd have to be to have missed the intense public debate the city has had over this very issue. To think bypassing your own damn city's governing body on this hyperlocal, incredibly emotionally fraught debate is a good idea?
But writing about the bill became unexpectedly complicated. I reached out to Clemmons, asked for comment on why he introduced the bill and why he was walking it back.
Clemmons at first called the bill a 'non-issue' via text message, then, through his spokesperson, said he'd have a call with me. A couple of days later, Clemmons changed his mind. Since Clemmons planned to withdraw the bill, his spokesperson said, he wouldn't be fielding questions about it.
But no one else would talk either, not even people who appeared to be instrumental in talking to Clemmons about the wisdom of pulling the bill. Not even a 'no comment.' Just crickets.
Local Democrats and anti-surveillance activists see the non-bill as worthy of discussion. The seven or eight people who did talk to me — off the record — maintain that the story is worth telling, lest another state lawmaker get any bright ideas about trampling all over Nashville's efforts to direct the ways and reasons for which the police are authorized to use surveillance technology.
Councilmember Rollin Horton said he was surprised to see a Nashville lawmaker file a bill to preempt a local measure, especially in such sweeping fashion. In addition to preempting Nashville's existing regulations of surveillance technology, the bill would have allowed the police to bypass local procurement requirements and enter into contracts without the Metro Council's approval.
'How can we condemn state preemption on other issues when this bill is, in fact, state preemption,' said Horton. Clemmons' bill or any similar effort by a local Democrat in the future could set a 'dangerous precedent' and 'silence our city's discussions and concerns,' Horton added.
Anti-surveillance activist Lydia Yousief, who runs the Elmahaba Center in Nashville, said Clemmons' withdrawal of the bill is not cause for celebration.
How can we condemn state preemption on other issues when this bill is, in fact, state preemption?
– Metro Nashville Councilmember Rollin Horton
'You can't slap somebody in the face and say, 'Oh, my bad,' without a full discussion as to why you thought this was appropriate,' said Yousief. 'It doesn't necessarily matter that the bill doesn't exist anymore. What is concerning is the lack of transparency about why you think these are good ideas.'
Democrats in the state legislature have, for years, bemoaned the Republican supermajority's efforts to preempt local control over all manner of issues, from short-term rentals to school vouchers.
Given this history, local Democrats were surprised to see one of their own looking to preempt Nashville's rules governing police use of surveillance technology. Nashville Democrats wouldn't have been surprised if the bill had come from a Republican lawmaker; in 2022, two Republicans filed, but ultimately withdrew, a preemption bill similar to the one Clemmons proposed last month.
Nashville Metro Council passes controversial license plate readers
In his 'prebuttal' to the governor's state of the state address this year, Clemmons spoke about Democrats' focus on strengthening public safety 'by addressing the root causes of crime — poverty, lack of health services, unsafe housing, and easy access to illegal guns.'
Conspicuously missing from that list: allowing local police to bypass the local governing body to unilaterally implement a massive surveillance network free of any oversight or accountability.
But that's just what Clemmons was looking to do, and withdrawing the bill – or refusing to talk about it — won't make the issue go away.
Clemmons ended his prebuttal with a call to action: 'We can get our state back on track…But we need your voice. Demand better.'
On this, I'll agree: we should demand better. But those demands shouldn't be limited to the Republicans in the room. Democrats shouldn't get a pass just because they don't want to turn Guantanamo Bay into a glorified concentration camp for undocumented immigrants.
If you want to claim the moral high ground, you've got to be willing to acknowledge when you've lost it.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Legal pressure mounts against Gov. Polis over ICE data disclosure
Legal pressure mounts against Gov. Polis over ICE data disclosure

Axios

time12 minutes ago

  • Axios

Legal pressure mounts against Gov. Polis over ICE data disclosure

Legal pressure is mounting against Democratic Gov. Jared Polis after revelations that he ordered state officials to comply with an ICE subpoena and hand over personal data of undocumented children in Colorado to federal immigration agents. The latest: Colorado WINS — the union representing more than 27,000 state workers— civil rights group Towards Justice and labor organization Colorado AFL-CIOannounced Monday they're joining as plaintiffs on a whistleblower lawsuit filed last week by Scott Moss, a senior labor official in Polis' administration. The groups accuse the governor of "colluding" with ICE agents and violating multiple state laws that restrict cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in non-criminal matters. The intrigue: Polis has agreed not to act on the subpoena until after the judge rules on a request for a temporary restraining order and injunction, according to his attorney's court filing last week. The big picture: The backlash highlights growing fractures in Polis' support among labor leaders, civil rights advocates and Latino Democrats — many of whom viewed him as an ally. Just weeks ago, Polis signed a bill prohibiting state and local officials from collecting or sharing information about immigration status unless it directly involves a criminal investigation. What they're saying:"The actions that Gov. Polis has taken are undermining public trust in our state government," Colorado WINS president Diane Byrne said at a news briefing on the steps of Denver City Hall on Monday. "This action by the governor represents a betrayal to the immigrant community of our state," the Colorado Democratic Latino Caucus said in a statement Monday, adding that Polis has turned "his back on some of the most vulnerable residents." Catch up quick: On April 24, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security subpoenaed the state labor department for detailed records — including wage data, leave filings and home addresses — for 35 people sponsoring unaccompanied migrant children. According to the records, Polis initially resisted but later reversed, ordering staff to comply or face termination. The other side: The governor's office defends its action, saying it was a criminal matter. "We are committed to partnering on criminal investigations ... including to protect against human trafficking and child exploitation," Polis' spokesperson Eric Maruyama told us. Reality check: The subpoena reviewed by Axios Denver makes no mention of any open criminal investigation, nor is it court-ordered. Instead, the administrative request references broad "investigative activities" to ensure children released to sponsors were safe — citing general risks of trafficking or exploitation. Crucially, a checkbox on the subpoena that would formally classify the request as involving child exploitation was left blank. The bottom line: Polis' office appears to be casting a civil immigration enforcement request as a criminal matter — sidestepping state law to justify a politically risky decision of turning over immigrant data to ICE.

Mark Green to resign from House after final vote on ‘big, beautiful bill'
Mark Green to resign from House after final vote on ‘big, beautiful bill'

The Hill

time15 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Mark Green to resign from House after final vote on ‘big, beautiful bill'

Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) on Monday said he plans to resign from Congress after the House holds a final vote on the party's 'big, beautiful bill,' giving up his seat as well as his leadership post on the House Homeland Security Committee. Green said he has already lined up a job outside of Congress. 'It is with a heavy heart that I announce my retirement from Congress. Recently, I was offered an opportunity in the private sector that was too exciting to pass up. As a result, today I notified the Speaker and the House of Representatives that I will resign from Congress as soon as the House votes once again on the reconciliation package,' Green said in a statement. 'Though I planned to retire at the end of the previous Congress, I stayed to ensure that President Trump's border security measures and priorities make it through Congress. By overseeing the border security portion of the reconciliation package, I have done that. After that, I will retire, and there will be a special election to replace me.' His decision to stay until the House gives the GOP's tax cuts and spending package a final stamp of approval is a relief for Republican leadership, who are contending with a razor-thin majority and passed the same bill by a single vote last month. Senate Republicans are planning to make a host of changes to the legislation and the House is expected to hold a vote this summer on approving the revised bill. It's the second time Green has said he plans to resign. Green said in February 2024 that he planned to resign from Congress, but he ultimately reversed course and kept his seat, saying he decided to seek reelection after encouragement from the public and President Trump. Green's resignation will leave the House with 219 Republicans and 212 Democrats, meaning the GOP can only afford to lose three votes and still pass party-line legislation, assuming all members are president — the same dynamic that currently stands. Green's departure will open up a sought-after chairmanship on a panel that reviews much of Trump's signature immigration policies. Under former President Biden, Green was a vocal critic of the administration, holding numerous hearings focused on fentanyl deaths and bringing in parents who had lost children in deaths they deemed connected to immigration or the border. Under Trump, the committee has held hearing focused on Biden-era immigration policies as well as budget issues as the White House pushes to vastly expand deportation operations. Green, a physician, is also a veteran, and served tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was given the gavel after just two terms in Congress, and will leave during his fourth term.

Trump says it would 'great' to arrest Newsom. Their relationship and politics at play
Trump says it would 'great' to arrest Newsom. Their relationship and politics at play

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says it would 'great' to arrest Newsom. Their relationship and politics at play

President Donald Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are sharply at odds as protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement continue in Los Angeles -- and both are framing their confrontation as not only about the protests but also in terms of politics, some of which are appearing in ways they've dealt with before. On Monday, the president said it would be a "great thing" if border czar Tom Homan arrested Newsom; in response, the California governor fired back that the comment is an "unmistakable step toward authoritarianism." Asked on Monday afternoon by ABC News what crime Newsom has committed to warrant his arrest, Trump said the governor's "primary crime is running for governor because he's done such a bad job." Newsom responded on X, "Donald Trump admits he will arrest a sitting governor simply because he ran for office." MORE: War of words between Trump and Newsom over LA protests escalates with arrest threat With the protests, Trump, who has characterized them as "violent, insurrectionist mobs" and "Gavin Newscum inspired Riots," has deployed National Guard members to Los Angeles. Newsom has asked the administration to rescind the deployment and said Monday that he is suing the Trump administration, claiming Trump illegally federalized the National Guard. But Trump is not only criticizing the protestors -- he has also criticized the leaders of the state and the city, framing their political leadership as failures. "The very incompetent 'Governor,' Gavin Newscum, and 'Mayor,' Karen Bass, should be saying, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR,'" Trump wrote on his social media platform on Monday. "Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren't needed, and that these are 'peaceful protests.'" Trump has also long been critical of the leadership in most Democratic-run states, often focusing his ire on California. MORE: Johnson: Trump did 'exactly what he needed to do' in sending National Guard to LA The situation, separately, gives Trump the chance to take high-profile action on immigration enforcement -- a key issue for the president during his 2024 campaign and one that has remained a priority during the first few months of his administration. A recent poll from Marquette Law School taken in early to mid-May found that Trump had positive or around even job approval on border security and immigration. Newsom, on his end, has explicitly accused the White House of exacerbating the situation for political gain. "They want a spectacle. They want the violence," he said in an email to supporters sent through his political action committee on Sunday night. "They think this is good for them politically." ABC News has asked the White House for comment on Newsom's claim. MORE: What's in Trump's 'big' tax and immigration bill House Republicans are struggling to pass Newsom and Trump have long been at odds, although the two had a brief detente in their relationship in the past few months. In the aftermath of wildfires in January that devastated the Los Angeles region, Trump visited the city toward the end of the month and was greeted on the tarmac by Newsom with several handshakes and an embrace; Newsom also met with Trump in Washington in early February, and told CNN afterwards, "I have just all the confidence in the world that it's going to be a strong partnership moving forward." But Newsom, around that time, also approved $50 million for funds that could be used in legal battles against the federal government. And Newsom grew more critical of Trump in the months afterward -- attacking the president's tariff policy in an ad that aired on Fox News where he said the "tariffs punish families." The Trump administration has appeared to direct punishment at California as well. Earlier this month, Trump vowed to impose "large scale fines" on California after a transgender teen competed in a California state final competition in track and field. Last week, the Trump administration signaled that it would cut federal funding for a high-speed rail project in the state. Newsom, separately, has begun to build a national profile amid speculation that he could run for president in 2028, which included stoking more speculation through a buzzy podcast launch in March. Newsom is term-limited and cannot run for governor in 2026. While the Los Angeles situation is tied to Newsom's current work as governor and not to any current or future campaign, it puts him back in the national spotlight and at the center of one of the nation's highest-profile political issues. Newsom referenced what he framed as the national stakes in his response to Trump's comments on his potential arrest: "This is a day I hoped I would never see in America… this is a line we cannot cross as a nation." ABC News' Molly Nagle and Michelle Stoddart contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store