Congressional committees announce investigation into Nashville Mayor
Two Congressional committees announced a federal investigation into Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell on May 30, accusing the mayor of obstructing a U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement in the wake of a major immigration operation in early May.
The Committee on Homeland Security—chaired by U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Tennessee—and the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives, sent a letter demanding investigative materials from the mayor as part of a federal effort to conduct 'oversight of state and local jurisdictions that endanger American communities through efforts aimed at thwarting the work of federal immigration officials.'
The move comes after weeks of public pressure by U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles, who held a press conference on Memorial Day weekend calling for the investigation.
'While the state of Tennessee has outlawed sanctuary policies, recent actions from your office threaten to chill immigration enforcement in the City of Nashville and Davidson County,' the letter reads. 'Accordingly, we write to request information about how your recent actions, including a directive to Nashville and Davidson County employees to disclose their communications with federal immigration officials, affects the robust enforcement of immigration law.'
Until May 30, O'Connell has declined to comment on Ogles' calls for a congressional investigation. At the mayor's weekly news conference with Nashville reporters, O'Connell said his office intended to 'appropriately respond' to the requests listed in the letter from members of Congress. He also said he's not concerned about the investigation finding any wrongdoing.
'I am not particularly concerned,' O'Connell said. 'We're going to, again, respond appropriately to all inquiries. We have been guided by a full understanding of state and federal law and will continue to be.'
More: What to know about how Mayor O'Connell responded to Nashville ICE operation
Nashville is weeks removed from the weeklong immigration enforcement operation, during which ICE and the Tennessee Highway Patrol made 468 traffic stops and arrested nearly 200 immigrants. The ICE sweeps were concentrated in south Nashville, in neighborhoods around Nolensville Pike and Harding Place with a large population of immigrants and Latino residents.
Friday's letter condemns O'Connell's public statements of opposition to the ICE operation, as well as a community charity fund that, while announced by O'Connell at a May 5 press conference, is run by a community nonprofit and does not utilize taxpayer funds.
More: D.C. Republicans pile on Nashville mayor over ICE response — and imply more action in city
It also expresses 'concern' about a previously standing executive order updated by O'Connell requiring city departments to report communications with federal immigration officials to the mayor's office.
The order, titled Executive Order 30, isn't new — in fact, it's well over a year old, having first been issued in January 2024. But it's reemerged in the wake of the ICE operation because O'Connell amended it to allow for a shorter timeline for reporting.
Regardless, the order is a key focus in the investigation.
'This Executive Order could have a chilling effect on the ability of local law enforcement to communicate freely and candidly with federal immigration employees,' the letter states, adding that there is 'real potential that your Executive Order could have the effect of diminishing ICE enforcement operations.'
The letter lists three key requests for the city, all concerning documents created between May 1 and the receiving of the letter:
All documents and communications referring or relating to the amendment of Executive Order 30
All documents and communications referring or relating to ICE enforcement actions in the City of Nashville or Davidson County
All documents and communications 'between or among Metro employees and non-Metro employees, including but not limited to non-governmental organizations, referring or relating to the arrest of criminal aliens in the City of Nashville and Davidson County'
The information is tagged with a June 13 deadline, and is signed by Chairman of the Committee on Judiciary Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security and Enforcement Tom McClintock, R-California, Ogles and Green.
'Today, with the full support of Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green, we're taking action," said Ogles, in a press release regarding the investigation. "If Mayor O'Connell wants to spy on federal agents doing their job, then Congress is going to investigate him for obstruction.'
The letter came a day after the city of Nashville was added to a federal list titled 'Sanctuary Jurisdictions Defying Federal Immigration Law,' which was posted on the Department of Homeland Security's website.
There are only two 'sanctuary jurisdictions' listed in Tennessee — Nashville and Shelby County. DHS says each jurisdiction will receive formal notification of its non-compliance with federal statutes.
It's not immediately clear why Nashville — or any jurisdiction in Tennessee — is included on the list, given that neither has self-identified as a sanctuary city. In Tennessee, sanctuary cities have been banned for about seven years, and another state law passed earlier this year criminalizes local officials who support sanctuary policies for immigrants.
O'Connell also commented on Nashville's appearance on the list at his May 30 news conference. He passed out copies of the state law to reporters and said Nashville complies with 'every single component' of the law and, by definition, is not a sanctuary city.
O'Connell added that Nashville does not have — and has never had — a policy violating the state law. He said the city has asserted over the past several weeks that it has no legal authority related to immigration enforcement and does not impede law enforcement action.
'I'm puzzled about the criteria they used to include Nashville (on the list),' O'Connell said. 'We are not and never have been a sanctuary city. If you look at the state law that defines a sanctuary city policy there are six factors, and we do not and never have had a policy that violates any of those factors. I'd be interested to learn what criteria they're using.'
The USA TODAY Network - Tennessee's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Have a story to tell? Reach Angele Latham by email at alatham@gannett.com, by phone at 931-623-9485, or follow her on Twitter at @angele_latham
Austin Hornbostel is the Metro reporter for The Tennessean. Have a question about local government you want an answer to? Reach him at ahornbostel@tennessean.com.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Congressional committees announce investigation into O'Connell, city
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
34 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Today in History: June 21, US Constitution becomes law
Advertisement In 1834, Cyrus Hall McCormick received a patent for his mechanical reaper. In 1893, the first Ferris wheel opened to the public as part of the Chicago World's Fair. In 1942, an Imperial Japanese submarine fired shells at Fort Stevens on the Oregon coast, but caused little damage. In 1954, scientists of the American Cancer Society presented a study to a meeting of the American Medical Association in San Francisco, Calif., which found that men who regularly smoked cigarettes died, particularly from lung cancer, at a considerably higher rate than non-smokers. In 1964, civil rights activists James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner were murdered in Neshoba County, Miss. Their bodies were found buried in an earthen dam six weeks later. (Forty-one years later, on this date in 2005, Edgar Ray Killen, an 80-year-old former Ku Klux Klansman, was found guilty of manslaughter in their deaths; he was sentenced to 60 years in prison, where he died in January 2018.) Advertisement In 1982, a jury in Washington, D.C., found John Hinckley Jr. not guilty by reason of insanity in the shootings of President Ronald Reagan, Press Secretary James Brady, Washington D.C. police officer Thomas Delahanty, and Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy. In 1989, a sharply divided Supreme Court ruled, in Texas v. Johnson, that burning the American flag as a form of political protest was protected by the First Amendment. In 1997, the WNBA made its debut as the New York Liberty defeated the host Los Angeles Sparks 67-57. In 2004, the aircraft SpaceShipOne made the first privately funded human spaceflight. In 2010, Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistan-born US citizen, pleaded guilty to charges of plotting a failed car bombing in New York's Times Square. (Shahzad was later sentenced to life in prison.)
USA Today
44 minutes ago
- USA Today
Some Democrats are finally standing up to Trump – even if it gets them arrested
Not all Democrats are afraid to push back against Donald Trump's immigration policy. Some are willing to be detained. In safely blue areas of the country, constituents are asking themselves who has the audacity to stand up to President Donald Trump's extreme immigration agenda. Earlier this week, New York City constituents got their answer. On June 17, New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents while escorting a man out of immigration court in Manhattan. Lander, who repeatedly asked to see a judicial warrant for the man ICE was attempting to detain, was held in custody for four hours. The federal government is still trying to decide whether it will charge him with a crime. 'We're not just showing up for just a few families, or for the strength of our democracy,' Lander told the supporters waiting for him outside the federal courthouse. 'We are showing up for the future of New York City.' While it's unclear that Lander's arrest will make any difference in his chances to be New York City's next mayor, one thing is now certain: He is the kind of person the city and Democrats need in the Trump era. Democrats should be fighting Trump's systematic hate Lander is now a member of an exclusive group of Democratic politicians who have gotten into legal trouble for combating the Trump administration's extreme deportation agenda. These politicians are not doing anything wrong – they are simply trying to stand up for the immigrants who make this country great. Opinion: Trump lied about the LA protests so you wouldn't see what he's really doing The first to face legal repercussions was Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who was arrested in April and later indicted for allegedly assisting an undocumented immigrant in escaping arrest. Then in May, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested at an ICE detention center when three members of New Jersey's congressional delegation arrived for an unannounced inspection. Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who was also arrested that day, was indicted on June 10 for allegedly interfering with immigration officers. Less than a week before Lander's arrest, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California, was handcuffed and thrown out of a Department of Homeland Security news conference. This defiance is encouraging to see. People who have the privilege of a public platform are putting their careers on the line to stand up for those who are being terrorized by the federal government. These actions, so long as they are peaceful, are how Democrats should be reacting to the Trump administration. We need a mayoral candidate who suits New York Until this moment, Lander had flown under the radar for the duration of the city's mayoral race. Despite his position as the city's top financial officer and an endorsement from a panel of experts with The New York Times, Lander has been polling behind front-runner Andrew Cuomo, a former New York governor, and Zohran Mamdani, a member of the New York State Assembly. Who is Zohran Mamdani? A Democratic socialist is running for NYC mayor. I hope he can rally voters. | Opinion It's not that Lander is a bad candidate – he's experienced and policy-driven, and he has a progressive view of what the city can be. He and Mamdani have cross-endorsed each other in the hopes of besting Cuomo in the ranked-choice voting system. Lander just doesn't have Cuomo's name recognition or Mamdani's charisma. By getting arrested, Lander has shown New Yorkers that someone is willing to stand up for their values of protecting immigrants. We don't have to elect Cuomo, who had to resign in disgrace in 2021 after more than a dozen women accused him of sexual harassment. Nor do we have to elect incumbent Eric Adams, who has welcomed ICE into our city against the wishes of the voters. Lander is showing us that we could have someone who is willing to fight the Trump administration while leading the nation's most populous city. And he's one of several showing Democrats the way forward. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
How Animal Testing in US Could Be Transformed Under Trump
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Millions of animals each year are killed in U.S. laboratories as part of medical training and chemical, food, drug and cosmetic testing, according to the non-profit animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). For many animals held captive for research, including a huge range of species from dogs, cats and hamsters to elephants, dolphins and many other species, pain is "not minimized," U.S. Department of Agriculture data shows. The issue of animal testing is something most Americans agree on: it needs to change and gradually be stopped. A Morning Consult poll conducted at the end of last year found that 80 percent of the 2,205 participants either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: "The US government should commit to a plan to phase out experiments on animals." Since President Donald Trump began his second term, his administration has been making moves to transform and reduce animal testing in country, although the question remains as to whether it will be enough to spare many more animals from pain and suffering this year. Animal Testing In US Could Be Transformed Animal Testing In US Could Be Transformed Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva What Is The Trump Administration Doing About It? There have been various steps taken in different federal agencies to tackle the issue of animal testing since Trump was sworn in on January 20. In April, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it was "taking a groundbreaking step to advance public health by replacing animal testing in the development of monoclonal antibody therapies and other drugs with more effective, human-relevant methods." The FDA said that its animal testing requirement will be "reduced, refined, or potentially replaced" with a range of approaches, including artificial intelligence-based models, known as New Approach Methodologies or NAMs data. A Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) official told Newsweek: "The agency is paving the way for faster, safer, and more cost-effective treatments for American patients. "As we restore the agency's commitment to gold-standard science and integrity, this shift will help accelerate cures, lower drug prices, and reaffirm U.S. leadership in ethical, modern science." The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced it was "adopting a new initiative to expand innovative, human-based science while reducing animal use in research," in alignment with the FDA's initiative. The agency said that while "traditional animal models continue to be vital to advancing scientific knowledge," new and emerging technologies could act as alternative methods, either alone or in combination with animal models. The NIH Office of Extramural Research told Newsweek it was "committed to transparently assessing where animal use can be reduced or eliminated by transitioning to [new approach methodologies (NAMs)]." "Areas where research using animals is currently necessary represent high-priority opportunities for investment in NAMs," the agency added. It added that it will "further its efforts to coordinate agency-wide efforts to develop, validate, and scale the use of NAMs across the agency's biomedical research portfolio and facilitate interagency coordination and regulatory translation for public health protection." During Trump's first term, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a directive to "prioritize efforts to reduce animal testing and committed to reducing testing on mammals by 30 percent by 2025 and to eliminate it completely by 2035," an EPA spokesperson told Newsweek. Although, the spokesperson added: "the Biden Administration halted progress on these efforts by delaying compliance deadlines." As a member of the House, Lee Zeldin, the EPA's current administrator, co-sponsored various bills during Trump's first term regarding animal cruelty, covering issues such as phasing out animal-based testing for cosmetic products; ending taxpayer funding for painful experiments on dogs at the Department of Veteran Affairs; empowering federal law enforcement to prosecute animal abuse cases that cross state lines; and others, the spokesperson said. What The Experts Think Needs To Be Done The Trump administration's efforts to tackle the issue of animal testing appear to be a step in the right direction, according to experts who spoke with Newsweek. "I was pleasantly surprised and quite frankly a bit shocked to read the simultaneous announcements by the NIH and the FDA regarding a new emphasis on the use of alternatives to animals," Jeffrey Morgan, a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at Brown University in Rhode Island, told Newsweek. Morgan, who is also the director of the Center for Alternatives to Animals in Testing at Brown University, said that both agencies are moving together in the same direction on the issue "sends a unified and very powerful message to the research and biotech communities." He added that the announcements showed "a major acknowledgement of the limitations of the use of animals in research and testing." "What is especially exciting is that the NIH announcement will encourage the entry of new investigators into the field, further accelerating innovation in alternatives with exciting impacts for both discovery and applied research across all diseases," he said. He added that the FDA announcement and its emphasis on a new regulatory science that embraces data from alternatives was "equally exciting." "The demands of this new regulatory science will likewise accelerate innovation because it will establish the much-needed regulatory framework for the rigorous evaluation of data from alternatives," he said. While the administration's initiatives to shift research away from animal testing is heading in the right direction, its policies are "overdue," Dr. Thomas Hartung, a professor in the department of environmental health and engineering at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Maryland, told Newsweek. "The animal tests for safety were introduced more than 50 years ago. There is no other area of science where we do not adapt to scientific progress," he said. Hartung added that animal "testing takes too long and is too expensive to really provide the safety consumers want." He said that running animal tests for new chemicals can cost millions and take years in some cases. "Nobody can wait that long, even if they can afford the testing costs," he said. Hartung also believes the shifts in the industry to reduce animal testing have been "coming for a while," as over the last two decades, America's opposition to animal use in medical research has been increasing. "The alignment of FDA and NIH really makes the difference now, which I think is evidence of a strong relationship of their leaderships," he said. Yet in order to make a real difference, Hartung said clear deadlines are key to show that "this is not just lip service." He also said that he thought "the transformative nature of artificial intelligence in this field is not fully acknowledged." "We also need an objective framework for change to better science, such as the evidence-based toxicology approach," he said.
