To view this email online, paste this link into your browser:
[link removed]





Today, I opposed and voted against HB8005 ([link removed]) and introduced an amendment in an attempt to lessen its detrimental impact on citizens who exercise their constitutionally protected rights to speak and peacefully assemble.  My statement on the House floor is as follows: 

Paid for by Friends of John Ray Clemmons

It is no secret that I oppose the legislation before us, and I regret that I need to introduce an amendment to protect the rights of our fellow citizens.  It is not a coincidence that this legislation is before us at this time, this significant moment in history.

I approach this legislation like I approach and evaluate most of the legislation that comes before me – as a student of history.  I make a good faith attempt to not only view legislation through the eyes of what is popular today, but how it will play out down the road and be viewed through the lens of history.

In this vein, as I read, I often think about what I would have done during key moments throughout our nation’s history.  It is easy for me and all of us to look back with the benefit of hindsight and know which was the right side and the wrong side and tell ourselves that we would have always been on the right side of history.

What is more challenging to do is place ourselves in the shoes of the men and women living and experiencing that moment in history, knowing and acknowledging the real risks that existed to their personal health and safety or even their political careers.

As I read, I ask myself:

Would I have been standing behind John Lewis and Rev. Williams on that bridge staring down troopers on horseback with hate in their eyes and clubs in their hands?

Would I have gotten on a Greyhound or Trailways bus following the South’s lack of enforcement of the Court’s ruling in Boynton v. Virginia?

Would I have sat next to Diane Nash at the Woolworth’s lunch counter and allowed other white men to put cigarettes out on my neck and not stand up, fist-clinched and react violently?

I, like all of us, like to think the definitive answer to every one of those questions is YES.  We like to think we would have been on the right side of history in those historic moments.  I pray that I would have been.

But, in truth, it is impossible for any of us in this Chamber to say with absolute certainty what we would have done under those circumstances at those moments in time under those circumstances.

All we can do is make decisions and act and vote in a manner every day we have the honor of representing Tennesseans and serving in this Chamber that we feel are appropriate and in the best interest of our constituents - with the sincere and very real hope that our actions and votes will one day be viewed by our grandchildren and future generations as having been on the right side of history.

As we come together today, we are all acutely aware that it is not a coincidence that a bill addressing camping on public property and increasing penalty for protesters is before this House at this specific moment in time.

The individuals camping out across the street from this building are still there, because our governor refuses to meet with them and have a conversation.  I have personally sent the governor two letters asking him to invite them into his office and listen.  This is what he was elected to do – not hide in his office behind a wall of state troopers, for which Tennessee taxpayers continue to be billed.  I have yet to receive the courtesy of a reply.

Looking again to history, previous leaders have acted much differently than our current governor.  In the middle of the civil rights movement, Nashville’s Mayor met with peaceful protesters who marched to our historic courthouse steps.

More recently, when citizens protested TennCare cuts, Governor Bredesen personally met with them and even fed them on one occasion.

True leadership takes many forms, but it never consists of hiding in one’s office and refusing to meet with those who may disagree with you and want to share their sincere concerns about the continued injustices and inequality still faced by many Tennessee families.

With the help of Mr. Eddie Weeks, an always reliable source for legislative history, I took a look at the legislative record to see what actions, if any, this legislative body took following protests in the past.  

First, I looked to one of the most heated protests in modern history that took place outside this building in 2002.  There was a constant presence of protesters, the constant blaring of horns rang across downtown for days, someone even broke the governor’s office window, and lawmakers were regularly accosted walking in the legislative plaza and in their community. 

Did this body hold a special session to increase criminal penalties for that protest?  No.  The then-governor did not, and even if he had, I am confident that Speaker Naifeh and Lt. Governor Wilder would not have allowed such legislation to pass.

I looked further back in time and reviewed the acts of this General Assembly following the sit-in’s that took place in this very city from February to May, 1960 during the civil rights movement.  Following those peaceful protests, the then-governor did not call a special session.  However, when the 82nd session of this General Assembly convened for legislative business in 1961, it passed 1961 Chapter 236 which read, in part, as follows:

“[I]t shall be a misdemeanor for any person to engage in disorderly conduct…or to make or to countenance or assist in making any improper noise, disturbance, breach of the peace, or diversion, or to conduct oneself in a disorderly manner, in any place to the annoyance of other persons….  [A]ny person violating the provision of this Act shall…be fined not less than $2.00 nor more than $50.00; and in the discretion of the Court be confined in the county jail or workhouse for not more than thirty (30) days.”

Increasing criminal penalties for “disorderly conduct” reads eerily familiar to the bill before us.  There can be little doubt about the true purpose and intent of that legislation following the sit-ins and as the civil rights movement gained momentum.  The members of this body who introduced and voted for that reactionary legislation were unquestionably on the wrong side of civil rights history. 

The legislation before us today, giving rise to this extraordinary session of this legislature, is identical in nature and spirit to that 1961 legislation. Yet, this is 2020.  Have we made such little progress in our State that we share the mindset of members who sat in these seats sixty years ago and opposed civil rights?

The sponsor of this legislation shockingly stated in committee, “You can support our law enforcement officers or you can spit in their face by voting against this bill.”  The truth is that this issue is not as clear cut as black and white.  Legislation never is.  However, the timing of this legislation certainly gives the appearance that this is about ‘white versus black’ or even ‘blue versus black.’

One day people are going to look back at this significant moment in civil rights history, and we will each be judged.  We will be judged, as surely as I stand in judgment of the members of the 82nd General Assembly with the admitted benefit of hindsight.  When we are judged, the political convenience of your vote will long be forgotten.  However, your courage for doing what is right will be remembered.

Colleagues, I ask that when you vote on my amendment and this bill, I respectfully request that you ask yourselves, “Will I be on the right side of history?”

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and sponsor.





2501 Oakland Avenue | Nashville, TN 37212 US

This email was sent to [email protected].
To ensure that you continue receiving our emails,
please add us to your address book or safe list.

manage your preferences ([link removed])
opt out ([link removed]) using TrueRemove(r).

Got this as a forward? Sign up ([link removed]) to receive our future emails.