State lawsuit heads to federal appeals court

Nearly three years after state lawmakers approved a resolution directing Tennessee to sue the federal government over refugee resettlement, the case is set to be heard by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On Tuesday, the Cincinnati-based federal appeals court will hear oral arguments from attorneys for the state and federal government in the first lawsuit of its kind.

The case in front of the court of appeals comes after Tennessee’s attorney general declined to initiate the state’s lawsuit and one year after a federal judge in a lower court dismissed the matter.

The case dates back to 2016, when the Tennessee Legislature overwhelmingly approved a resolution ordering the lawsuit.

When it was filed in March 2017, Tennessee became the first state in the nation to sue the federal government regarding refugee resettlement on the grounds of violating the 10th Amendment.

The 10th Amendment says the federal government possesses only the powers delegated to it by the U.S. Constitution and that all other powers are reserved for the states.

The Refugee Act of 1980 was designed to create a permanent procedure for the admission of refugees into the United States.

Other states have sued the federal government over refugee resettlement, but on different legal grounds.

Representing the state on Tuesday will be John Bursch, a former Michigan solicitor general who has argued 11 cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

He was hired by the Thomas More Center, which began representing the state in 2016. The Michigan-based law firm was hired after Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery declined to initiate the case.

At the time, Slatery said the lawsuit would be “based upon untested, novel theories of coerced spending or commandeering of the budget process.”

Among the arguments made by the state are that the federal government has forced Tennessee to pay for the refugee resettlement program.

The lawsuit also tried to force the federal government to stop resettling refugees in Tennessee until all costs associated with the settlement were incurred by the federal government.

Tennessee withdrew its participation from the refugee resettlement program in 2007. Since then, refugee resettlement has continued in Tennessee while being administered by Catholic Charities.

Although the charity says no state money is spent on resettlement efforts, some refugees are eligible to receive state services such as schools and health care.

The state has also argued that Tennessee faces a threat of losing billions of dollars in federal Medicaid funds if it refused to resettle refugees.

In the federal government’s 2017 motion to dismiss the case, attorneys argued the claim that Tennessee has been forced to spend state funds was “logic-defying.”

The government further argued that the Tennessee General Assembly was not able to bring forward the lawsuit.

In March 2018, U.S. District Judge S. Thomas Anderson sided with the federal government and dismissed the case.

On Tuesday, the federal government will be represented by Samantha Lee Chaifetz, an attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, who has worked for the government since 2007.

Several organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee and the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition opposed the 2016 resolution and criticized the state’s lawsuit, saying it will perpetuate a culture of fear.

Ahead of Tuesday’s oral arguments in Cincinnati, both organizations once again criticized Tennessee’s lawsuit.

“We trust that the Sixth Circuit will recognize that a state cannot simply choose to veto the federal government’s ability to resettle refugees,” said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the state ACLU.

“The ACLU remains firmly committed — along with our partners — to making clear that these kinds of malicious attacks on our Muslim family, friends and neighbors have no place in Tennessee.”

Stephanie Teatro, co-executive director of the rights coalition, said her organization hopes the Sixth Circuit dismisses the case like the lower court did.

“From the beginning, this lawsuit has been used by a handful of legislators to whip up fear and score cheap political points,” she said. “We urge lawmakers to drop this lawsuit and their harmful scapegoating of refugee communities.”

The case will be heard in front of Judges R. Guy Cole Jr., Danny J. Boggs and Julia Smith Gibbons.