Jonathan Skrmetti

Jonathan Skrmetti served as Chief Deputy Attorney General under Herbert H. Slatery III from December 2018[6] through December 2021.[2][7]

AG Slatery's office had attempted to specifically investigate Instagram back in 2021[8] and TikTok in 2022.[9] Skrmetti, as Chief Deputy Attorney General, argued against the then-planned Instagram for kids only, stating that the platform would be a means of having children become accustomed to social media when they are "psychologically vulnerable."[10]

See Children on Social media below for information on similar ongoing investigations.

Skrmetti was appointed by the Tennessee Supreme Court to serve an eight-year term on August 10, 2022, and was sworn in on September 1, 2022.[11] Tennessee is the only state in the country where the State Supreme Court appoints the attorney general as a non-partisan member of the Judicial Branch.[12]

In a September 2022 interview, Skrmetti said that because he would not need to be concerned with maintaining office through an election, he would be allowed to focus on his job, which he defined as "to be a good lawyer." He also stated that it is not within the purview of the AG's office to "make policy" while also acknowledging that based on the response from physicians, "there's room for some clarification" in the wording of the abortion statue, also known as the Human Life Protection Act.[13]

In his role as AG and Reporter of Tennessee, Skrmetti has instituted a strategic litigation unit with ten attorneys to focus on pending litigation involving the federal government, various Tennessee municipalities, and to focus on corporate activity within the state.[14] Regarding the special unit, Skrmetti stated, "I don't think that it's a partisan move to attempt to enforce the state's interests in affirmative litigation against the federal government. I think it's a part of the dynamic tension of separation of powers that keeps our system going and keeps everybody free."[15] However, he also stated, "Whichever party is in power in the White House, you can expect to see a lot of activity with the Attorneys General of the other side."[16]

On May 31, 2023, Skrmetti filed suit against twenty-one named manufacturers of products using PFAs and ten unnamed. The suit focuses on the manufacture and sale of AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) throughout the state rather than on the various consumer products which contain PFAs.[17] Skrmetti contends that the manufacturers not only knew about the risk PFAs pose to both organisms and the environment, but that they also concealed the level of harm the chemicals could cause in order to raise their profits.[18] The suit further claims that some of the named companies attempted to protect themselves from liability through fraud.[19][20]

The suit seeks both actual damages for not only the cleanup required to the environment and property in Tennessee, but also for the cost of investigating to prove the harm that has been done.[21][22][23] This cost would be substantial, as evidenced by 3M's settlement of a different lawsuit over PFAs to multiple public water systems for $10.3 billion.[24]

An investigation that began prior to Skrmetti being sworn in as AG involved obtaining medical records from Vanderbilt University Medical Center.[25] Stating that the records are part of a fraud probe, Skrmetti vowed, "[T]his investigation is directed solely at VUMC and related providers and not at patients or their families.”[26] The records obtained focus solely on transgender clinic patients,[27] which has prompted the ACLU to file a lawsuit against Skrmetti[28] for a law passed in Tennessee that prevents minor patients from receiving gender-affirming healthcare treatment.[29] Governor Lee's response on Twitter was to state that the purpose of the law is to "[protect] children from permanent, life-altering decisions."[30] The federal Department of Justice has also challenged the law denying gender-affirming care.[31][32]

Numerous patients received an e-mail from VUMC nearly one year after the records were provided to the AG, informing patients that the State of Tennessee has obtained their medical records.[33] Information provided to the AG included the names of patients referred to the VUMC transgender clinic and the names of the providers who referred them, including those who opted not to receive care.[34] VUMC did release a statement to notify patients and the public that the AG has a legal right to such records during an investigation, and that their release of the information did not violate HIPAA.[35] A statement from House Democratic Caucus Chair John Ray Clemmons excoriated Skrmetti for what Clemmons perceived to be a misuse of the AG's authority in order to promote a political agenda.[36][37]

The impetus behind both the law and the investigation into potential fraud at VUMC stems from a series of Tweets and videos posted by Matt Walsh.[38][39] VUMC maintains that Walsh misrepresented the care they provide, and that they will provide care in compliance with state law.[40]

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency appeal from the State on July 8, 2023, temporarily overturning a lower court ruling that provided an injunction against the State prohibiting hormone therapy for trans youth.[41][42] The ruling from Judge Sutton is in place while Skrmetti files an appeal of the lower-court ruling, and there is supposition that this case will eventually be presented to SCOTUS.[43][44]

Two patients have since sued VUMC, claiming,"People should be able to feel comfortable sharing their personal medical information with their doctors without fear that it will be handed over to the government."[45] The lawsuit goes on to state that the hospital's "failure to safeguard the privacy of its patients is particularly egregious," and mentions the fact that VUMC only notified patients of the state having their medical records after the information came to light during the case filed by L.W.[46] The suit further alleges that Skrmetti had a "target list" consisting of 106 patients when he contacted VUMC to request the records.[47] It was filed July 24, 2023 in Nashville Chancery Court. The plaintiffs are seeking class certification so that all affected patients can be included as litigants.[48]

Shortly after being sworn into office, AG Skrmetti issued a letter to the US Department of Education in opposition to adding "gender identity" to the wording of Title IX.[49]

In January 2023, he filed a brief[50] in support of a 2022 injunction against a sports competition under West Virginia's 2021 "Save Women's Sports Act"[51] preventing transgender students from participating in athletics on teams of "the opposite biological sex".[52] The focus of the WV law is on transfemale athletes, claiming that their assigned gender at birth provides them an unfair advantage thus undoing the very protections established by Title IX.[53]

The US DOE proposed a rule on April 13, 2023, to prevent schools from enacting blanket bans against trans athletes participating in sports teams aligning with their gender identity.[54] AG Skrmetti responded on May 15, 2023, in a letter to DOE Secretary Cardona in which he argued that the proposition violated both Title IX and the US Constitution.[55] This measure followed the passage of TN Senate Bill 2153 / House Bill 2316[56] on May 6, 2022.[57] The newly signed law extended a 2021 measure requiring high school athletes to prove their biological sex before participating in team sports to public universities across Tennessee.[58] The legislation has been described as "discriminatory and harmful" and "an attack on the LGBTQ+ community".[59] Supporters of Skrmetti's efforts have responded that "it’s about protecting women’s sports" and not transphobia.[60]

In March 2023, the LGBTQIA theatre company Friends of George's filed lawsuits against the State of Tennessee, AG Skrmetti, and Shelby County DA Steve Mulroy.[61][62] The suits argued that the vague language of a new state law restricting public drag performances (defining drag performers as cabaret and likening drag shows to strip clubs[63]) made it impossible to know what activity exactly it intended to curtail, especially in how the state law might be infringing on First Amendment protected speech.[64][65][66][67] When Judge Thomas Parker ruled on June 2, 2023, that the law did violate Constitutionally protected speech,[68][69] he pointed out that it was "substantially overbroad" despite the State's argument that the law would only apply to "expressive content that is harmful to a reasonable 17-year-old".[65][66][70]

Skrmetti had been a named defendant in the suit,[66] and joined filings before Judge Parker reached his decision: a motion to dismiss the case due to failure to state a claim and a motion to dismiss due to lack of jurisdiction.[71] Both of these motions were granted as Skrmetti was determined to be acting in his role as AG. Skremtti has filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge Parker's decision, pointing out that the same language Parker found to be vague is present throughout the Tennessee Code.[72][73]

Retired attorney Hannah Miyamoto (registered with the Hawaii bar) filed suit against Bill Lee, AG Skrmetti, and Davidson County DA Glenn R. Funk (all named) on March 8, 2023, in the Southern District of California, where she currently resides. The suit has been assigned Tennessee case number 3:23cv-00233.[74] She alleges that the TAEA, which AG Skrmetti has held is still in effect throughout Tennessee except in Shelby County,[75] prevents her from being able to perform her play, Twelve Nights with Viola and Olivia, in Nashville at TPAC. The play is based on Shakespeare's Twelfth Night, or What You Will, in which one of the main characters, Viola, spends the majority of the play impersonating a man. The case is currently pending.[76][77][78]

Governor Lee has stated that he is deferring to Skrmetti with respect to whether the TAEA is enforceable outside of Shelby County.[79]

After ticket sales for Taylor Swift's Eras Tour rose to as much as $28,000 per ticket on Ticketmaster,[80] Skrmetti opened an investigation into possible violations of antitrust laws, saying that the issue consumers experienced in obtaining tickets might be an indication of not enough competition,[81][82] though Ticketmaster and LiveNation's merger has been approved through 2025 by the US Department of Justice.[83] The incident did result in the DOJ once again probing the companies for breach of antitrust laws.[84] A statement from one of Ticketmaster's shareholders stated that the fiasco was caused by bots,[85] which may have put the company in violation of a 2008 bot-ban law passed in Tennessee.[86]

One area of concern Skrmetti said would be investigated was whether Ticketmaster/LiveNation profited off of the sales of the tickets twice,[87] as well as what consumers were promised regarding ticket availability.[88] Skrmetti clarified that the concern isn't that everyone who wants a ticket be able to purchase one, but that Ticketmaster made specific claims regarding the service they offer and the quality of that service, and because there is little to no competition, Ticketmaster has no incentive to provide what was promised.[89]

Though there hasn't been an official update from the AG's office since December 14, 2022,[90] Skrmetti did tell Time magazine in January 2023 that the investigation is still ongoing and that the evidence found so far "is not entirely consistent" with Ticketmaster's statement that their large market share is due to the difference in quality between their system and "the next best primary ticketing system."[91] When opening the investigation, Skrmetti stated, "If it's a consumer protection violation and we can find exactly where the problems are, we can get a court order that makes the company do better."[92]

Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia filed suit against AdoreMe.com in response to consumer complaints, alleging unfair trade practices against the retailer. Specifically at issue was the VIP program, in which customers were automatically charged a monthly fee of $39.95 unless they either made a purchase or logged into their account.[93] The state AGs argued that the program was deceptive as it did not properly disclose the terms, and customers were charged the monthly rate without understanding they would be required to take action before the sixth of every month to avoid the fee. Additionally, those who attempted to cancel their memberships found it extremely difficult and were forced to forfeit accrued store credit in order to do so. The retailer also misled consumers regarding discounts with a "countdown" that didn't actually affect purchase eligibility.[94][95]

The suit settled in June 2023, with the blanket amount of $2.35 million to be paid amongst the thirty-one states and D.C.[96][97][98] and refunds to be offered to the affected customers. AdoreMe.com was required to contact all eligible customers as part of the settlement agreement. As with many suits of this type, the retailer admits no wrongdoing as part of the settlement.[95][99]

Twenty-eight state AGs filed a letter on June 6, 2023, with the FCC asking them to clarify consent as it pertains to telemarketing robocalls and texts.[100] The letter was in response to CG 02-278[101] and CG 21-402.[102] The latter stated that network providers are required to block texts that can be found on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate list; that is to say, unallocated numbers that are spoofed for the purposes of contacting consumers.[103] The FCC scheduled a meeting on June 8, 2023, to discuss the former, which specifically pertained to express consent,[104] and the commission's comment period for the proposed changes ends on July 31, 2023.[105] The proposals so far presented are (1) to ensure that revoking any prior consent is not burdensome; (2) that it is honored within twenty-four hours; (3) that consumers are only required to request a company cease contact one time; and (4) that cell phone users are able to stop unwanted communications directly with their service provider.[106]

The AGs letter asserts that consent for contact should be limited to the consent given by the consumer to the company they are in contact with, eliminating the 'blanket consent' provided by using the website of a company like Assurance Insurance (the example used by the AGs), which requires consumers to agree to being contacted by their 2100 partner companies in order to get an insurance quote. The AGs point out that this is supported by language already existing in the TCPA.[107] They further show that the business guidance published in 2008 states that written permission for a third party, such as their given example with Assurance, is not permitted.[108]

A similar request for comments in March noted that some of the problems consumers face are not calls from numbers that are disconnected, but rather calls from individuals spoofing a legitimate business's number, or calls from individuals claiming to be affiliated with a legitimate business that are really attempts at phishing in order to scam consumers.[109]

Skrmetti filed suit against Michael D. Lansky, LLC, d/b/a Avid Telecom, on May 23, 2023, as a result of 200,000,000 calls to Tennesseans on the Do Not Call registry received from the company between December 2018 and January 2023.[110]

In 2023, the Attorney General's office put out a request for the public of Tennessee to share information regarding their children's experiences with harm on social media. The platforms being investigated for promoting harmful content to children are TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, SnapChat, and YouTube/YouTube Kids. A series of town hall-type meetings were held in March 2023 to discuss the impact of social media on children.[111][112][113][114] The contentions are that social media has caused a rise in both depression and anxiety in children; that social media causes long-term trauma by promoting isolation and judgment; and that the executives of social media platforms have exploited children by promoting the issues caused by social media for financial gain.[115][116][117]

At the beginning of March 2023, Skrmetti filed a Motion to Compel with the Chancery Court in Davidson County with respect to the request for information that had been made in 2022. According to the motion, the information TikTok provided was "nearly incomprehensible."[118] Forty-seven attorneys general, including Skrmetti, have launched a coordinated effort to investigate the platform.[119] On April 14, 2023, Governor Lee signed SB0834[120] (which then became public chapter 152)[121] banning TikTok - and any other video platform headquartered in China, such as WeChat and Sina Weibo - from being accessed on university campus networks. The apps can still be accessed while physically on campus, but users require their own connection (e.g. their cell phone data plan) in order to do so.[122][123][124][125]

As of August 2023, the investigation is ongoing.

On July 13, 2023, he spearheaded[126] a letter co-signed by the Attorneys General of Alabama (Steve Marshall), Arkansas (Tim Griffin), Indiana (Todd Rokita), Iowa (Brenna Bird), Kansas (Kris W. Kobach), Kentucky (Daniel Cameron), Mississippi (Lynn Fitch), Missouri (Andrew Bailey), Montana (Austin Knudsen), Nebraska (Mike Hilgers), South Carolina (Alan Wilson) and West Virginia (Patrick Morrisey) directed to the CEOs of Fortune 100 companies[127] referencing the Supreme Court decision to overturn Affirmative Action with respect to Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v President and Fellows of Harvard College).[128][129] The letter enjoins the CEOs of these companies to eliminate any bias in their hiring practices, which is defined within the letter's body as "discriminating on the basis of race, whether under the label of 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' or otherwise."[127] This letter is seen as controversial by many, with Fortune reporting that Greg Hoff, associate counsel for the HR Policy Association, pointed out that the SCOTUS decision does not affect hiring practices.[130] Pauline Kim, a professor at Washington University School of Law, also concludes that the decision has no effect on hiring practices.[131] MTSU's Kent Syler concurred, adding, "This is a situation where government is stepping into private business and telling them how they need to do their hiring."[132]

The HR Policy Association did file an Amicus brief[133][134] on the SCOTUS case, and after the decision was handed down by Chief Justice Roberts, they did reaffirm their commitment to DEI hiring practices for "nearly 400 of the largest employers in the United States."[135]

Reverend Al Sharpton responded to the letter, saying that the AGs can attempt to "bully companies, but they cannot make us buy from people who don't hire or won't do business with us."[136] Some perceive this letter as an attack on DEI policies and those who support them.[137][138] Among the recipients of the letter are Memphis-based FedEx and Nashville-based HCA Healthcare. Both companies have inclusivity practices publicly available on their websites. Tennessee state representatives pointed out that there are only eight African-American CEOs in Fortune 500 companies, and expressed some concern over how the letter seems to be intent on forcing government into the boardroom, a position that the Republican party has traditionally advocated against.[139]

In contrast, Skrmetti is quoted as saying that there are many other options available to corporations to help "disadvantaged people and communities of all races without resorting to crude racial line-drawing."[140][141] To bolster their argument against DEI, the AGs cited sections of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Tennessee Lookout adds that the letter also goes so far as to equate trying to hire a diverse work force with slavery: "In an inversion of the odious discriminatory practices of the distant past, today’s major companies adopt explicitly race-based initiatives which are similarly illegal."[132]

On July 19, 2023, Democratic Attorneys General in 20 states and the District of Columbia responded with their own letter to the Fortune 100 companies, claiming the legal arguments of Skrmetti's letter are dubious, and stating outright that the July 13 letter "is an attempt to intimidate the businesses and workers of America."[142][143] They also noted that the employment goals cited in the letter sent by the Republican Attorneys General are not 'quotas' and are therefore permissible under the law. Raúl Torrez, AG for New Mexico, was quoted as saying that those signing on with Skrmetti's letter "have distorted the recent ruling from the Supreme Court and stretched the rationale in this case."[144]

On February 10, 2023, the AG's office issued a letter to Davidson County district attorney Glenn Funk informing him that an investigation had been opened into whether Funk violated state wiretapping laws in installing surveillance cameras as security measures inside the DA offices.[145] DA Funk responded in a letter dated February 13, saying that the devices were installed in response to actual threats of violence against employees in the office, including one incident when police arrested a man outside the offices after he issued threats of both physical and sexual violence to two employees.[146] He also argued, "We have never conducted any unauthorized audio or video recording of any area where a person has a legitimate expectation of privacy."[147]

The investigation arose out of reports first released by News Channel 5 Nashville investigative journalist Phil Williams where their source for the installation of the devices, Jim Berryman, informed Williams that Funk had requested the microphones be installed into the cameras because the DA wanted have the ability to listen to protestors' conversations that might take place outside the DA's office.[148][149]

Skrmetti's office obtained a search warrant, executed on March 24 by Tennessee Bureau of Investigation agents. Funk had stated that an "invitation" had been extended to the TBI and the AG's office, adding, "We are pleased they are finally here and we expect their investigation will find nothing inappropriate, much less illegal."[150] Funk's office also issued a statement regarding the use of the word 'wiretapping,' saying, "That term implies our office did something wrong, which we did not. ‘Wiretapping’ requires judicial authorization. What we have are ‘Ring-like’ cameras, like you and your viewers probably have at their homes."[151]

As the investigation has continued, Funk has joined a motion filed by Scripps Media to have the court documents related to the seizure of evidence at Funk's office unsealed.[152] In the motion, Funk's attorney does state that Skrmetti obtained the search warrant after the AG's office and the TBI had already been invited to DA Funk's offices. He goes on to state that the unsealing of the evidence used to obtain the warrant "will confirm that any probable cause for this search warrant was predicated on either one or more individuals providing false information to law enforcement or a misapplication of the law" in his joinder motion.[153] Funk has also stated that a former assistant prosecutor with the Nashville DA's office is working on the investigation against him with AG Skrmetti's office, an allegation that the AG's office has denied.[154] Scripps argued before Judge Jennifer Smith that the public had a right to know, which assistant AG Cody Brandon said would interfere with the ongoing investigation. She has not yet issued a ruling stating that it may need to be referred back to Judge Cheryl Blackburn, the criminal court judge who issued the warrant.[152]

In May 2023, Skrmetti's office received a letter from the Attorneys General Alliance, providing an invoice for membership dues in the organization. Skrmetti's Chief of Staff, Brandon Smith, responded to the letter on May 17, 2023, declining to continue membership in the AGA, alleging that the organization is no longer a nonpartisan group. The deputy executive director of the alliance, Tanie Maestas, replied that they were unaware of any partisan concerns about their sponsors.[155] Only Tennessee and Wisconsin are currently listed as not being a part of the AGA.[156]

In May 2023, Skrmetti accepted an award from the Tennessee Faith & Freedom Coalition, who proclaimed him a "Defender of Freedom" for his work as AG.[157][158] The group is a self-proclaimed conservative, Christian, anti-Marxist organization.[159]