The 2014 Tennessee judicial elections featured three supreme court justices who faced opposition to their retentions and won by small margins. The general election was also one of the earliest in the nation, having concluded on August 7.[1]
Want to learn more about the biggest judicial elections in Tennessee in 2014? Check out the Tennessee Supreme Court elections, 2014 page for an in-depth exploration of the candidates, issues, politics and news surrounding the state's high court races.
Tennessee judicial elections come in two different varieties: appellate judges participate in retention elections, while trial court judges are selected via partisan elections. Judicial elections are held in August of even-numbered years, during the statewide primary.[5] Elected judges take office on September 1st.[6]
Primary elections may be held for trial court judges. The political parties in each county determine whether or not there will be a primary election in their respective counties.[6]
The candidate who wins a county primary election in May will then move on to the county general election in August and run against other party candidates that won their respective primaries.[7]
Primary elections in Tennessee serve to designate a party's nominee and narrow the field down to one candidate from that party for a specific office. A candidate who wins his or her party's primary will move on to the general election.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many It is not uncommon for a candidate to run unopposed in their party primary and then go on to run unopposed in the general election as well. Similarly, candidates may win their primary and go on to run unopposed in the general election.[7]
Voters do not need to declare their party affiliation when they register to vote. However, primary voters must declare whether or not they will be voting in the Democratic or Republican primary.[7]
By avoiding a review of the commission, as mandated by state law, the legislature allowed the governor to rely on a 2009 statute which allows the governor to appoint any qualified person to a court.[11]
Amendment 2 essentially requires the approval of the legislature, rather than that of the nominating commission, for judicial appointments.
According to Ballotpedia, Tennessee is represented by a Republican trifecta; the governorship, state senate and state house are all controlled by Republicans. In order to have a "Trifeca Plus," the state must also have a conservative supreme court.[12]
Though the state's supreme court retentions are nonpartisan, three of the state's justices were appointed to the court by a Democratic governor and the other two were appointed by Republican governors.[13]
Prior to the August election, Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey lead a public charge to unseat the three supreme court justices standing for retention in 2014, Gary R. Wade, Cornelia Clark and Sharon Lee. These justices were appointed by a Democrat, Governor Phil Bredesen. All three justices were retained on August 7, 2104.
Three Tennessee Supreme Court justices—Cornelia Clark, Sharon Lee, and Gary R. Wade—were retained in office following an August 7, 2014 vote. The elections followed a high-profile campaign, with each justice winning retention by a relatively narrow margin: Clark with 55.3 percent, Lee with 56.0 percent, and Wade with 56.6 percent.
Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey publicly opposed the justices’ retention, while the justices formed a campaign group, "Keep Tennessee's Supreme Court Fair," to support their efforts to remain in office.
The races drew significant attention due to the volume of money spent. According to campaign finance reports filed July 31, the three justices reported approximately $1,044,220 in contributions. The justices’ campaign group raised an additional $46,000. The opposition group, Tennessee Forum, raised $426,000, most of it from Ramsey's political action committee. The Republican State Leadership Committee also reportedly spent more than $196,000 opposing the justices. More than $987,000 in total was spent on television advertising.[14]
The New York Times reported that, although the justices were retained, the relatively close margins were viewed by some conservatives as a sign of shifting momentum. By contrast, in 2012, the 24 supreme court justices who faced retention elections nationwide received an average of 69.7 percent of the vote. Tennessee’s elections were compared to a similar 2012 effort in Florida that was ultimately unsuccessful.[15][16]
An uncontested judicial race in Tennessee drew attention during the 2015 Nashville mayoral campaign. Metro Councilwoman Megan Barry called for the resignation of Judge Casey Moreland, while a political action committee associated with businessman Bill Freeman expressed continued support for the judge. Barry and Freeman were both candidates or potential candidates in the 2015 mayoral race.[17]
Judge Moreland, of the Davidson County General Sessions Court, had served since 1995 and was unopposed for re-election in 2014. His role in a domestic violence case led to criticism after he waived a 12-hour "cooling-off" period and released a defendant, David Chase, who was later accused of reoffending. Attorney Bryan Lewis, a friend of Moreland’s, had misrepresented the nature of the relationship between Chase and his girlfriend, Lauren Bull.[17][18][19]
Three state senators filed a complaint about Moreland’s actions with the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct. In court the following month, Chase alleged that Bull had assaulted him.[17]
Moreland expressed regret over the decision but maintained that he acted independently. He said Barry’s criticism was politically motivated, which Barry then disputed.[17][19]
Freeman, a Democratic Party donor and chair of Nashville United for Fairness and Justice, defended the PAC’s endorsement of Moreland, which was made alongside support for other Davidson County Democrats in the August 7 primaries. Freeman said:
“
We just embraced all the Democrats. I'm a supporter of Casey's, and I'm happy to have him on that mailer.[20]
In 2014, three Tennessee Supreme Court justices faced a competitive retention election campaign marked by increased political attention and spending. Justice Cornelia Clark, who had previously won retention without campaigning in 2006, was joined by fellow justices Sharon Lee and Chief JusticeGary R. Wade in a high-profile effort to remain on the bench.[21]
Several conservative organizations, including Americans for Prosperity, became involved in the campaign against the justices. Ronald L. Ramsey, the Republican lieutenant governor, also contributed to opposition efforts through his political action committee. On the other side, attorneys and supporters of the justices raised nearly $1 million in advertising, according to the nonpartisan group Justice at Stake.[21]
Susan Kaestner, president of the Tennessee Forum—a PAC opposing the justices’ retention—commented on the elevated attention to the races:
“
People who care about it are very excited, and I think there’s been real interest in the issue. And I think we know that because it has turned into a real campaign.[20]
Tennessee uses a merit-based appointment system for its high court, followed by retention elections. Since the system’s expansion in 1994, only one state supreme court justice had lost a retention vote prior to 2014.[21]
Kaestner argued that retention elections are typically not competitive:
“
Generally, a retention election is not an election; it’s a coronation. I think these justices were assuming they were going to be coronated, and they allowed their partisanship to be exposed. And now they’re going to be held accountable to it in a very constitutional way.[20]
Justice Clark noted the challenges of campaigning in a judicial context:
“
The issues we talk about are not made-for-media issues. They are not 30-second sound-bite issues. They require a lot of discussions, sometimes arcane discussions.[20]
Critics of the court cited its 2006 selection of Attorney General Robert E. Cooper, Jr. and his decision not to join a lawsuit challenging the Affordable Care Act. Some also raised concerns about court decisions they believed were unfavorable to business interests or victims' rights.[21]
Three of five seats on the high court were on the August 7 ballot. Because two justices appointed by Republican Governor Bill Haslam were joining the court in September, the election presented an opportunity for a change in court majority. Governor Haslam, however, did not participate in the campaign.[21]
Memphis Bar Poll affirms attorneys support for incumbent judges
The Memphis Bar Association surveyed local attorneys on judicial candidates in the 2014 elections. Their results showed strong support for incumbents, especially in retention elections for the supreme and appellate courts, where support was nearly unanimous.[22]
The poll, open to 1,383 active attorneys in Shelby County (not limited to Memphis Bar members), asked respondents to select the most qualified candidate in contested races—or “no opinion” where undecided.[23]
In July 2014, a group of Tennessee Republicans led by House Majority Leader Gerald McCormick (R–Chattanooga) issued a letter calling for changes to the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC), which reviews judges' qualifications before retention elections.[25]
The letter cited a Wall Street Journal opinion claiming the process “transferred power to state bar associations” and made judicial selection “dominated by partisan politics.”[25]
Separately, independent gubernatorial candidate John Jay Hooker and others filed a complaint against JPEC members, citing a January ruling by Judge Hamilton V. Gayden that the commission’s composition (with only two women out of nine members in a state 52% female) violated equal protection.[26]
Despite the ruling, JPEC continued to recommend that 22 appellate judges appear on the August 7 retention ballot—a decision later challenged by Hooker's complaint.[26]
Jonathan Steen, writing for the Tennessee Bar Association, countered these legal challenges by noting that an appeal was underway and that the judicial order remained in effect, supporting the legality of JPEC's actions.[27]
Early voting for Tennessee’s August 7 judicial elections began July 18 and continued through August 2. Voters selected trial court judges and voted on appellate judge retention.[28]
In the lead-up to the 2014 retention elections, blogger George Scoville filed a complaint accusing Justices Cornelia Clark, Sharon Lee, and Gary R. Wade of violating judicial ethics by campaigning for each other and using court resources.[31]
Key allegations included:
Use of court facilities or staff in campaign materials.[32]
Holding interviews in court chambers.
Establishing **Keep Tennessee's Supreme Court Fair**, described as a political organization funded by the justices' campaign funds.[33]
The complaint cited Canon 4, Rule 4.1 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which restricts judges from political activity and using court resources for campaigns.[32]
Supporters of the justices responded via the campaign group’s website, stating the matter was nonpartisan:
“
This fight isn’t partisan, Democrat vs. Republican — it’s about keeping politics out of our courts completely...We must vote to retain our judges based on their proven records...[20]
State senator calls for review of judicial complaint process
June 9, 2014
Click for story→
Senator Mike Bell, chair of the Government Operations Committee, announced plans in late May 2014 to hold a hearing on how Tennessee handles judicial misconduct complaints. Bell initiated this effort after the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct dismissed a complaint he filed against Chief Justice Gary R. Wade.[35]
Bell’s November 2013 complaint alleged that Wade violated judicial ethics rules by appearing to publicly support three appellate judges while speaking to the Knoxville News Sentinel.[35]
At the time, Judges Andy D. Bennett (Court of Appeals), Camille McMullen, and Jerry L. Smith (Court of Criminal Appeals) were undergoing evaluations by the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC). Preliminary reviews from some commission members were unfavorable. Judges must receive a satisfactory final report to run unopposed in a retention election; otherwise, they must seek re-election in a contested race.[36]
In a November 10, 2013, article, Wade was quoted saying the judges “deserve new terms.”[36] All three received positive remarks in the interview, though Judge Smith, who had entered a guilty plea following a DUI arrest, withdrew from consideration later that month. McMullen and Bennett were recommended for retention.
According to Board Chair Chris Craft, the board investigated the matter as an “internal complaint” and dismissed it. The board concluded that Wade’s comments addressed whether the judges should be eligible to run in retention elections, not whether voters should re-elect them. Disciplinary counsel determined the comments did not constitute public endorsements. Wade received a confidential notice of dismissal on December 18, 2013, which also cautioned him that such remarks could be interpreted as a violation of the judicial code of conduct.[36]
Several other Senate Republicans raised concerns about the board's handling of judicial complaints. House Majority Leader Gerald McCormick supported the hearing and criticized the justices' campaign efforts. He stated, “They need to be replaced,” and accused them of “aggressive” fundraising efforts and partisan behavior.[35]
Justices and judicial reform on the ballot in Tennessee
Ramsey, a Republican, met with various groups to raise funds in opposition, arguing the three Democratic-appointed justices should be removed. If voters rejected the justices, their replacements would be appointed by Republican Governor Bill Haslam.[38]
The court is responsible for selecting the state's attorney general. Ramsey expressed interest in shifting the court's political balance, stating, “Folks, it’s time that we had a Republican attorney general in the state of Tennessee.”[38]
Governor Haslam declined to support Ramsey’s campaign, citing concern that it could influence a separate ballot measure—Tennessee Judicial Selection, Amendment 2 (2014)—which proposed changes to the judicial appointment process. Haslam supported the amendment and expressed concern that voters could be confused by simultaneous debates over retention and constitutional reform.[39]
The amendment proposed retaining the governor’s authority to appoint appellate judges and preserving the retention election system, while also granting the Tennessee State Legislature power to confirm or reject appointments.[39]
Members of Tennessee’s legal community expressed support for Supreme Court Justices Cornelia Clark, Sharon Lee, and Gary R. Wade ahead of their August 2014 retention elections.
On May 14, a fundraiser for the justices' campaign raised $100,000. Later, on May 27, the Nashville Bar Association Board of Directors passed a resolution encouraging members to vote in favor of retention.[40]
That same day, the Tennessee Bar Association (TBA) announced it would conduct a candidate evaluation poll of the justices. The organization stated: “The TBA is taking this unprecedented step as part of its efforts to help ensure that the 2014 judicial elections maintain a fair, impartial and accountable judiciary.”[41]
Former Chief Justice Frank Drowota also voiced support for retention, stating:
“
To have politics come into the courts makes absolutely no sense.[20]
These efforts responded to opposition from Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey. His communications director, Adam Kleinheider, responded to the legal community’s actions by saying:
“
It is not surprising that a group of Nashville lawyers with a vested interest in protecting a liberal Supreme Court are getting engaged in this process.[20]
Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey opposed the August 2014 retention of Tennessee Supreme Court Justices Cornelia Clark, Gary R. Wade, and Sharon Lee. His actions drew criticism for appearing partisan, including from some within his own party.[43]
Ramsey circulated materials criticizing the justices—appointed by former Democratic Governor Phil Bredesen—and met with business and victims’ rights groups. The materials alleged the justices were "soft on crime" and anti-business.[43] Ramsey is also affiliated with the Republican State Leadership Committee, a national group involved in judicial elections.[21]
He criticized specific rulings made by the justices, who are prohibited from publicly commenting on those decisions. Ramsey defended his actions, saying voters deserved to hear both sides.[44]
Some Republican critics expressed concern about Ramsey’s campaign. Former appellate judge Lew Conner and former Supreme Court Chief Justice William "Mickey" Barker said it threatened judicial independence. Barker stated:
“
We have three branches of government...And the judicial branch is non-political...It would be a real shame to see that occur.[20]
Ramsey rejected claims of politicization, arguing that voter input “legitimizes” the process. He also said the existing system was designed by Democrats to favor their candidates, adding: “I’d like all the justices serving on the state supreme court to be Republicans, I’ll be right up front about that.”[44]
A Republican judicial candidate in Knox County faced scrutiny in 2014 after federal records showed she owed nearly $60,000 in back taxes.[45]
Patti Jane Lay, a candidate for Division IV of the Sixth Circuit Court, had unpaid taxes dating from 2000 to 2003. Records from the Knox County Register of Deeds indicated she owed $11,300, and her husband owed $46,700, for a combined total of $58,000. The lien was filed four years before the election.[45]
Lay stated the lien stemmed from a “clerical mistake” and believed it had been resolved through an appeal in 2010. Her brother, CPA Edwin Lay, confirmed they had pursued a correction for what he described as a processing error.[45]
Lay practiced law at her Knoxville-based firm, The Law Offices of Patti Jane Lay. She earned her undergraduate degree from Emory University and her J.D. from the University of Tennessee College of Law.[46][47]
↑ 6.06.1Information emailed to Judgepedia by the Director of Communications for the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts on March 24 and April 3, 2014.
↑ 20.020.120.220.320.420.520.620.720.8Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
From Ballotpedia - Reading time: 26 min
EncycloReader
is supported by the 
KSF