ÿWPCA 3U:Ú %n­* 04×#  N^ w@$4dx mz†‘ 0J 0Ta 0^µ 0h 0r{ 0|í 0†i 0ï 1u 0dô AQX Æ© 0Do 0@³ 0Dó D/7 Bf Bƒ D3 U6ÓB) DC2 AMuU*Âìv~ðvÓn<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiX3|xb «<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXÂxþ6X@É“8õ X@( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎleñ$ˆ NUOUPUQURUSETUÓ€_bê‚_#“ ¸„ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀdelaney v. thompson - opinion Î  ' IB011T10IB011T1 .   2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d,,,,7Border 1dd!#-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial úÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€+ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌJuly€16,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ Ð ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ_ÔÑ7€òXXdÈdÈ7ÑÞ ÞÌÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌÌROBERT€L.€DeLANEY,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€98„1048„I(II)(III)ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.ÌBROOK€K.€THOMPSON,€et€al.,à à)à à01A01„9806„CH„00304ÌÙ€!ÙßR€.0-A1-j|` Ò `€€@ÿRßà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellants.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURTÌà@ àFOR€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€ELLEN€HOBBS€LYLE,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌÌòòFor€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:à àà àòòFor€Defendants/Appellantsóó:ÌÌRobert€L.€DeLaneyà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMichael€E.€MooreÌà àà àà àà àà àà àSolicitor€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMichael€W.€CatalanoÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssociate€Solicitor€GeneralÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòòFor€Amicus€€CuriaeóóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòòAmerican€Judicature€Societyóó:à àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àHarris€A.€GilbertÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPatricia€J.€CottrellÌà àà àà àà àà àà àBarry€FriedmanÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWyatt,€Tarrant€&€CombsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àAFFIRMED€IN€PART,Ìà@ àREVERSED€IN€PART,Ìà@ àDISMISSED,€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌJOE€D.€DUNCAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÇÌà@ àò òòòOPINIONÌÌÌÓÓóóà àó óThis€is€an€expedited€appeal€before€a€special€panel€of€theÏMiddle€Section€of€the€Tennessee€Court€of€Appeals€sitting€inÏNashville.€€The€subject€matter€is€the€constitutional€validity€ofÏthe€Tennessee€Plan€for€the€selection€and€retention€of€stateÏjudges€as€established€by€the€General€Assembly€and€documented€inÏÔ_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€Ô_ÔSecsÔ_Ô.€17„4„101,€òòetóó€€òòseqóó.ÌÌà àThe€appellee,€Hon.€Robert€L.€Ô_ÔDeLaneyÔ_Ô,€a€member€of€the€barÏand€eligible€by€age€and€legal€training€to€seek€a€seat€upon€thisÏcourt,€filed€suit€to€enjoin€the€conduction€of€the€August€1998Ïelection€for€seats€upon€this€court€under€the€proceduresÏestablished€for€such€elections€under€the€Tennessee€Plan.€€HeÏcited€six€grounds€for€his€thesis€that€the€General€Assembly€hadÏestablished€an€unconstitutional€election€procedure€to€be€followedÏin€the€election€of€judges€to€this€court.ÌÌà àThe€learned€chancellor€ruled€that€the€comprehensive€schemeÏof€the€Tennessee€Plan€is€unconstitutional€because€"it€drasticallyÏlimits€the€group€of€persons€who€can€become€appellate€judges€andÏvirtually€insures€the€name€of€the€incumbent€on€the€ballot€therebyÏeliminating€the€right€contained€in€Article€VII,€section€4€forÏappellate€judges€to€be€"elected€by€the€qualified€voters."€€TheÏState€Coordinator€of€elections,€Brook€Thompson,€was€permanentlyÏenjoined€from€following€the€Tennessee€Plan€procedures€in€theÏconduct€of€the€August€1998€election€for€seats€upon€this€court.€ÍThe€trial€court€held€the€other€five€allegations€of€constitutionalÏdefects€in€the€subject€statutory€scheme€to€be€without€merit.€ÏBoth€sides€have€appealed.ÌÌà@ àòòò òThe€Tennessee€PlanÌó óóóÔ_Ôà àT.C.A.€Sec.€17„4„101€provides€that€the€declared€purpose€andÏintent€of€the€general€assembly€by€the€passage€of€this€chapterÏ[is]€to€assist€the€governor€in€finding€and€appointing€the€best€Ìà@ à„2„Ìqualified€persons€available€for€service€on€the€appellate€courtsÏof€Tennessee,€and€to€assist€the€electorate€of€Tennessee€to€electÏthe€best€qualified€persons€to€the€courts;€to€insulate€the€judgesÏof€the€courts€from€political€influence€and€pressure;€to€improveÏthe€administration€of€justice;€to€enhance€the€prestige€of€andÏrespect€for€the€courts€by€eliminating€the€necessity€of€politicalÏactivities€by€appellate€justices€and€judges;€and€to€make€theÏcourts€"nonpolitical".ÌÌà àT.C.A.€Sec.€17„4„102€establishes€a€fifteen€member€judicialÏselection€commission.€€Twelve€members€shall€be€attorneys€who,Ïfrom€experience€and€observation€are€familiar€with€the€bestÏqualifications€and€characteristics€of€judges.€€They€are€to€beÏnominated€by€various€professional€groups.€€Three€members€are€non„lawyers.€€The€speakers€of€the€senate€and€house€make€the€finalÏappointments.€€They€must€consciously€select€a€diverse€mixtureÏwith€respect€to€race€and€gender,€and€the€appointees€are€selectedÏstatewide.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€Sec.€17„4„109€provides€for€meetings€of€the€commissionÏat€which€interested€candidates€and€their€supporters€may€appear€inÏsupport€of€their€application€for€nomination€to€the€governor.€€TheÏpublic€may€also€participate€for€or€against€any€candidate.€€TheÏcommission€selects€three€persons€"whom€the€commission€deems€bestÏqualified€and€available€to€fill€the€vacancy"€and€certify€thoseÏnames€to€the€governor.ÌÌà àT.C.A€Sec.€17„4„112€provides€that€the€governor€makes€theÏappointment€from€the€three€nominees;€or€the€governor€may€rejectÏthe€three€and€request€another€panel,€from€which€a€selection€mustÏbe€made.€€Under€€T.C.A.€Sec.€17„4„113€the€governor€may€appointÏany€qualified€licensed€attorney€if€the€nominating€commissionÏfails€to€ÓÓsubmit€nominees€within€60€days.ÌÌÓÓÌÌà@ à„3„Ìà àT.C.A€Sec.€17„4„116€provides€the€procedure€for€a€person€suchÏas€the€appellee€to€become€a€candidate.€€It€provides€that€where€anÏincumbent€appellate€court€judge,€whether€appointed€or€elected,Ïfails€to€file€a€declaration€of€candidacy€for€election€to€anÏunexpired€term€or€to€a€full€eight€(8)€year€term€within€theÏprescribed€time,€or€if€such€judge€after€the€qualifying€dateÏwithdraws€as€a€candidate,€a€vacancy€is€created€in€the€office€atÏthe€expiration€of€the€incumbent's€term€effective€September€1.€€InÏthis€event€the€judicial€selection€commission€shall€furnish€a€listÍof€nominees€for€the€office€to€the€governor€as€provided€by€T.C.A.ÏSec.€17„4„109.€€From€such€list,€the€governor€shall€appoint€aÏsuccessor€to€fill€the€vacancy€effective€September€1.€€TheÏappointment€is€subject€to€the€action€of€the€electorate€in€theÏnext€regular€August€election.€€The€appointee€shall€file€aÏdeclaration€of€candidacy€and€be€voted€on€as€provided€in€T.C.A.ÏSecs.€17„4„114€and€17„4„115.€€This€record€reflects€that€JudgeÏHenry€Todd€of€this€court€will€retire€at€the€end€of€August€1998,Ïcreating€such€a€vacancy€as€is€addressed€in€this€section.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€Sec.€17„4„201€establishes€a€judicial€evaluationÏcommission€of€twelve€members,€selected€by€various€professionalÏgroups,€and€appointed€by€the€Judicial€Council€and€the€speakers€ofÏboth€houses€of€the€General€Assembly.€€Race€and€gender€balance€areÏexplicitly€mandated.€€Each€sitting€appellate€court€judge€isÏevaluated€and€the€evaluations€published.€ÌÌà àThis€statute€also€creates€a€judicial€evaluation€guidelinesÏcommission;€whose€nine€members€are€appointed€by€the€court€of€theÏjudiciary,€the€board€of€professional€responsibility,€the€judicialÏcouncil,€the€speaker€of€the€house,€the€speaker€of€the€senate,€andÏthe€deans€or€their€designee€from€each€of€the€four€law€schools€inÏTennessee.€€The€function€of€this€group€is€to€adopt€a€program€forÏappellate€court€judges€to€aid€the€public€in€evaluating€theÏperformances€of€incumbent€judges.ÌÌà@ à„4„Ìà@ àò òòòThe€Modified€Missouri€PlanóóÌà àó óThe€passage€of€the€foregoing€Tennessee€Plan€in€1994€carriedÏwith€it€the€repeal€of€the€pre„existing€Modified€Missouri€Plan.€ÏUnder€this€system€of€electing€all€appellate€court€judges€inÏTennessee,€incumbent€judges€would€no€longer€run€on€a€contestedÏbasis,€but€instead€would€run€on€a€retention€or€yes/no€basis.€€TheÏestablishing€act,€Chapter€198€of€the€Public€Acts€of€1971,Ïestablished€an€Appellate€Court€Nominating€Commission€to€beÏcomposed€of€nine€members.€€When€vacancies€occurred€on€any€of€theÏappellate€courts€after€July€1,€1971,€the€Appellate€CourtÏNominating€Commission€would€accept€applications€from€attorneysÏand€then€conduct€a€public€hearing€and€such€additional€private€orÏpublic€meetings€as€it€deemed€necessary.€€It€was€required€toÏsubmit€the€names€of€three€applicants€to€the€Governor€forÏconsideration€to€fill€the€vacancy.€€The€Governor's€choice€wouldÏfill€the€vacancy€and€would€stand€for€election€at€the€next€AugustÏbiennial€election,€the€ballot€question€being:€"Shall€òò€€€€€€€Ï(name)€€€€€€€€€óó€be€elected€and€retained€in€office€as€òò€€€€€€€€Ï(office)€€€€€€€€óó€€Vote€yes€or€no."€€As€the€terms€of€all€incumbentÏappellate€court€judges€expired€they€would€each€stand€forÏretention€election€for€a€full€eight€year€term€in€the€same€manner,Ïwith€no€other€candidates€appearing€on€the€ballot.ÌÌà àOn€May€1,€1973,€the€General€Assembly€passed€1973€Tenn.€Pub.ÏActs€Ch.€443,€removing€the€Justices€of€the€Supreme€Court€from€theÏModified€Missouri€Plan.€€Governor€Winfield€Dunn€vetoed€this€act,Ïbut€the€General€Assembly€overrode€the€veto€on€February€14,€1974,Íand€it€became€law.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€was€not€againÏunder€a€retention€election€plan€until€the€passage€of€theÏTennessee€Plan€in€1994.ÌÌà àThe€preamble€to€the€Modified€Missouri€Plan€expressed€itsÏpurposes€in€these€words:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€is€the€declared€purpose€and€intent€of€theÏGeneral€Assembly€of€Tennessee€by€the€passageÌÌÌà@ à„5„ÌÌà8 àà8 àof€this€Act€to€assist€the€Governor€in€findingÏand€appointing€the€best€qualified€personsÏavailable€for€service€on€the€appellate€courtsÏof€Tennessee€and€to€assist€the€electorate€ofÏTennessee€to€elect€the€best€qualified€personsÏto€said€courts;€to€insulate€the€justices€andÏjudges€of€said€courts€from€politicalÏinfluence€and€pressure;€to€improve€theÏadministration€of€justice;€and€to€enhance€theÏprestige€of€and€respect€for€the€appellateÏcourts€by€eliminating€the€necessity€ofÏpolitical€activities€by€appellate€justicesÏand€judges;€and€to€make€the€appellate€courtsÏof€Tennessee€"non„political".ÌÌÌÌÓÓà@ àòòò òRelevant€Constitution€ProvisionsóóÌòòÌUnited€States€Constitution,€Amendment€5:óóÌÓÓó óà8 àà8 à€€€[No€person€shall]€be€deprived€of€life,Ïliberty,€or€property,€without€due€process€ofÏlaw;€*€*€*ÌÌò òÌÌòòUnited€States€Constitution,€Amendment€14:óóÌó óÌà8 àà8 à*€*€*€No€state€shall€make€or€enforce€any€lawÏwhich€shall€abridge€the€privileges€orÏimmunities€of€citizens€of€the€United€States;Ïnor€shall€any€state€deprive€any€person€ofÏlife,€liberty,€or€property,€without€dueÍprocess€of€law;€nor€deny€to€any€person€withinÏits€jurisdiction€the€equal€protection€of€theÏlaws.òòÌóóà àÌò òòòÌÌConstitution€of€Tennessee,€Article€VI,€Sections€3€and€4.óóÌó óÌà8 àà8 àSec.€3.€€Supreme€court€judges.€„„€The€JudgesÏof€the€Supreme€Court€shall€be€elected€by€theÏqualified€voters€of€the€State.€€TheÏLegislature€shall€have€power€to€prescribeÏsuch€rules€as€may€be€necessary€to€carry€outÏthe€provisions€of€section€two€of€thisÏarticle.€€Every€Judge€of€the€Supreme€CourtÏshall€be€thirty„five€years€of€age,€and€shallÏbefore€his€election€have€been€a€resident€ofÏthe€State€for€five€years.€€His€term€ofÏservice€shall€be€eight€years.ÌÌà8 àà8 àSec.€4.€€Judges€of€inferior€courts.€„„€TheÏJudges€of€the€Circuit€and€Chancery€Courts,Ïand€of€other€inferior€Courts,€shall€beÏelected€by€qualified€voters€of€the€districtÏor€circuit€to€which€they€are€assigned.€€EveryÏJudge€of€such€Courts€shall€be€thirty€years€ofÏage,€and€shall€before€his€election,€have€beenÏa€resident€of€the€State€for€five€years€and€ofÏthe€circuit€or€district€one€year.€€The€termÏof€service€shall€be€eight€years.ÌÌÌà@ à„6„ÌÌà8 àà8 àSec.€8.€€General€law€only€to€be€passed.€„„ÏThe€Legislature€shall€have€no€power€toÏsuspend€any€general€law€for€the€benefit€ofÏany€particular€individual,€nor€to€pass€anyÏlaw€for€the€benefit€of€individualsÏinconsistent€with€the€general€law€of€theÏland;€nor€to€pass€any€law€granting€to€anyÏindividual€or€individuals,€rights,Ïprivileges,€immunities,€or€exemptions€otherÏthan€such€as€may€be,€by€the€same€law€extendedÏto€any€member€of€the€community,€who€may€beÏable€to€bring€himself€within€the€provision€ofÏsuch€law.€*€*€*€*€*ÌÌà8 àà8 àSec.€11.€€Incompetency€of€judges.€€SpecialÏjudges.€„„€*€*€*€*€The€Legislature€may€byÏgeneral€law€make€provision€that€specialÏjudges€may€be€appointed,€to€hold€any€CourtsÏthe€Judge€of€which€shall€be€unable€or€fail€toÏattend€or€sit;€or€to€hear€any€cause€in€whichÍthe€Judge€may€be€incompetent.€€[Pursuant€toÏthis€provision€the€General€Assembly€hasÏpassed€several€statutes,€including€T.C.A.ÏSec.€17„2„102€(allowing€the€governor€toÏappoint€lawyers€to€replace€disqualifiedÏSupreme€court€justices);€T.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„105Ï(allowing€the€governor€to€appoint€replacementÏjudges€on€intermediate€appellate€courts);ÏT.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„107€(allowing€the€governorÏto€appoint€replacement€General€Sessions€CourtÏJudges€and€to€permit€sitting€by€interchange);ÏT.C.€A.€Sec.€17„2„108,€(allowing€parties€toÏlitigation€in€circuit€and€chancery€andÏsessions€courts€to€select€by€consent€a€memberÏof€the€bar€to€serve€as€judge€or€chancellor€inÏall€civil€cases);€T.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„109Ï(allowing€the€chief€justices€of€the€supremeÏcourt€to€assign€retired€judges€to€service);ÏT.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„110€(allowing€the€chiefÏjustice€to€assign€judges€and€chancellorsÏoutside€their€district);€T.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„115Ï(allowing€the€governor€to€appoint€a€qualifiedÏperson€to€serve€as€judge€or€chancellor);ÏT.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„116€(allowing€the€governorÏto€appoint€a€special€judge€to€replace€aÏdisabled€judge€or€chancellor);€T.C.A.€Sec.Ï17„2„118€(allowing€the€members€of€the€bar€andÏthe€clerk€to€elect€a€judge€or€chancellor€proÏtempore€when€the€regular€judge€is€absent€orÏis€unable€to€hold€the€court);€and€T.C.A.€Sec.Ï8„48„205€(allowing€the€governor€to€appoint€aÏtemporary€replacement€for€a€judge€inductedÏinto€the€military€service).]ÌÌÓÓÌà@ àò òòòStandards€for€Reviewing€the€Constitutionality€of€Statutesóóó óÌà àEvery€presumption€should€be€made€in€favor€of€theÏconstitutional€validity€of€statutes.€€òòBank€of€State€v.€Cooperóó,€10ÏTenn.€599€(1831).€€Every€intendment€and€presumption€must€be€madeÏin€favor€of€a€statute€whose€constitutionality€is€questioned,€andÏevery€doubt€must€be€resolved€to€sustain€it;€and€where€it€isÌÌà@ à„7„Ìsubject€to€two€constructions,€that€which€will€sustain€itsÍconstitutionality€must€be€adopted.€€òòCole€Mfg.€Co.€v.€Fallsóó,€90ÏTenn.€466,€16€S.W.€1045€(1891);€òòKirk€v.€Stateóó,€126€Tenn.€7,€150ÏS.W.€83€(1911).ÌÌà àA€statute€must€plainly€violate€the€constitution€before€theÏcourts€will€pronounce€it€void.€€òòSmith€v.€Normanóó,€13€Tenn.€270Ï(1833).€€The€courts€will€never€construe€a€statute€to€beÏunconstitutional€if€it€will€admit€of€any€reasonable€constructionÏconsistent€with€the€constitution.€€òòArrington€v.€Cottonóó,€60€Tenn.Ï316€(1873).€€The€court€in€òòCottonóó€held€that€in€construingÏstatutes,€the€courts€will€look€at€the€objects€aimed€at€by€theÏlegislature,€and€not€the€particular€verbiage,€in€which€a€statute,Ïin€some€of€its€parts,€may€be€expressed.€€If€the€real€object€aimedÏat€is€within€the€legislative€competency,€and€can€be€clearly€seenÏfrom€the€whole€statute€taken€together,€and€the€history€of€theÏprior€legislation€upon€the€same€subject,€the€courts€will€not€beÏturned€aside€by€particular€expressions€which,€taken€byÏthemselves,€might€seem€to€indicate€that€the€legislature€wasÏassuming€to€transcend€its€constitutional€power,€but€will€giveÏeffect€to€the€will€of€the€legislature€thus€discovered.ÌÌà àIt€is€a€primary€rule€that€a€statute€must€be€construed,€ifÏpossible,€to€save€its€constitutionally.€€òòTurner€v.€Eslickóó,€146ÏTenn.€236,€240€S.W.€786€(1921);€òòConsolidated€Enters,€Inc.€v.ÏStateóó,€150€Tenn.€148,€263€S.W.€74€(1924).€€It€was€held€inÏòòKnoxville€Power€&€Light€Co.€v.€Thompsonóó,€152€Tenn.€223,€276€S.W.Ï1050€(1925)€that€a€legislative€act€will€never€be€declared€to€beÍunconstitutional€if€it€is€possible€to€avoid€so€doing.ÌÌà àLaws€enacted€by€the€legislature€are€entitled€to€aÏpresumption€of€constitutionality.€€òòState€ex€rel.€Maner€v.€Leechóó,Ï588€S.W.€2d€534,€540€(Tenn.€1979).€€Where€there€is€doubt€as€toÏthe€meaning€of€the€constitution,€or€a€seeming€conflict,€it€is€aÏcourt's€duty€"to€ÌÌà@ à„8„Ìharmonize€such€portions€and€favor€the€construction€which€willÏrender€every€work€operative."€€òòShelby€County€v.€Haleóó,€200€Tenn.Ï503,€292€S.W.€2d€745€(1956);€òòState€ex€rel.€Hooker€v.€Thompsonóó,ÏNo.€01S01„9605„CH„00106,€slip€op.€(Tenn.€1996).ÌÌà àThe€rule€of€stare€decisis€is€peculiarly€applicable€in€theÏconstruction€of€written€constitutions.€€A€cardinal€rule€inÏdealing€with€written€instruments€is€that€they€are€to€receive€anÏunvarying€interpretation,€and€that€their€practical€constructionÏis€to€be€uniform.€€A€constitution€is€not€to€be€made€to€mean€oneÏthing€at€one€time€and€another€at€some€subsequent€time,€when€theÏcircumstances€€may€have€so€changed€as,€perhaps,€to€make€aÏdifferent€rule€in€the€case€seem€desirable.€€The€principal€shareÏof€the€benefit€expected€from€written€constitutions€would€be€lostÏif€the€rules€they€established€were€so€flexible€as€to€bend€toÏcircumstances,€or€be€modified€by€public€opinion.€€òòMcCully€v.ÏStateóó,€102€Tenn€509,€53€S.W.€134€(1899);€òòState€ex€rel.€Pitts€v.ÏNashville€Baseball€Clubóó,€127€Tenn.€292,€154€S.W.€1151€(1913).ÌÌà@ àòòò òAnalysisÌÌó óóóà àThe€Modified€Missouri€Plan€was€challenged€as€beingÏunconstitutional,€primarily€upon€the€contention€that€it€did€notÏprovide€for€an€election€in€the€traditional€sense.€€The€SupremeÏCourt€addressed€this€issue€and€held€that€plan's€retentionÏelection€to€be€constitutional.€€òòState€er€rel.€Higgins€v.€Dunnóó,Ï496€S.W.€2d€480€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€reasoning€of€the€court€wasÏthat€the€constitutional€provision€calling€for€elections€by€theÏqualified€voters€was€not€self„executing,€and€that€the€GeneralÏAssembly€had€the€power€and€duty€to€structure€the€procedures.ÌÌà àWe€have€heretofore€pointed€out€multiple€instances€in€whichÏjudges€may€take€office€by€appointment€without€an€election€of€anyÏtype.€€Obviously,€this€was€done€by€the€General€Assembly€in€theÌÌà@ à„9„Ìexercise€of€its€general€powers.€€It€is€interesting€to€note€that€aÏtraditional€election€by€the€qualified€voters€in€1870,€when€thisÏconstitution€was€adopted,€would€have€been€limited€to€males€overÏage€21€who€had€paid€a€poll€tax.€€It€cannot€be€doubted€that€theÏGeneral€Assembly€had€the€power€to€update€the€definition€ofÏqualified€voters€to€include€women€and€18„year„olds€and€toÏeliminate€the€poll€tax.€€Our€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€anÏelection€could€be€restructured€to€hopefully€constitute€a€betterÏway€for€providing€judges.€€We€adopt€the€following€language€fromÍòòDunnóó:ÌÌà àArticle€7,€Section€4€is€in€the€following€words:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à"The€election€of€all€officers,€and€theÏfilling€of€all€vacancies€not€otherwiseÏdirected€or€provided€by€this€Constitution,Ïshall€be€made€in€such€manner€as€theÏLegislature€shall€direct."ÌÌà8 àArticle€7,€Section€7€provides€for€the€general€electionsÏto€be€held€on€the€first€Thursday€in€August€precedingÏthe€expiration€of€the€terms€of€judges€and€other€civilÏofficers.€It€provides€also€that€"No€special€electionÏshall€be€held€to€fill€a€vacancy€in€the€office€of€JudgeÏor€District€Attorney,€but€at€the€time€herein€fixed€forÏthe€biennial€election€of€civil€officers;€and€suchÏvacancy€shall€be€filled€at€the€next€Biennial€electionÏrecurring€more€than€thirty€days€after€the€vacancyÏoccurs."ÌÌà8 àà àThis€constitutional€requirement€that€members€ofÏthe€Supreme€Court€shall€be€elected€by€the€qualifiedÏvoters€of€the€State€is€not€self„executing.€€The€holdingÏof€an€election€envisions€much€more€than€fixing€a€dateÏwhen€it€is€to€be€held€and€providing€that€only€qualifiedÏvoters€shall€participate.€€Provisions€must€be€made€byÏlaw€for€nominating€and€qualifying€of€candidates,Ïcertification€of€results€and€the€like.€€òòState€ex€rel.ÏFerguson€v.€Superior€Ct.€of€King€Countyóó,€(WashingtonÏSup.€Ct.)€148€Wash.€636,€250€P.€66.€€Such€executoryÏdetails€can€be€provided€either€in€the€ConstitutionÏitself€or€left€to€the€Legislature.€They€are€entirelyÏabsent€from€Article€6,€Section€3.ÌÌà àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 à.€.€.€Stated€differently,€the€rule€is€that€a€self„executing€provision€of€the€constitution€does€notÏnecessarily€exhaust€legislative€power€on€the€subject,Ïbut€any€legislation€must€be€in€harmony€with€theÏconstitution€and€further€the€exercise€of€constitutionalÏright€and€make€it€more€available.€€16€Am.€Jur.€2d,€Sec.Ï95,€p.€280.ÌÌà àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌÌà@ à„10„ÇÌà8 àà à.€.€.€The€1971€Act€[the€Modified€Missouri€Plan],Ïof€course,€makes€other€provisions€controlling€theÏelection€of€members€of€the€appellate€courts,€the€mostÏnotable€and€far„reaching€of€which€are€the€incumbentÏshall€be€required€to€run€on€his€record€and€not€againstÏan€opponent€and€that€the€Governor€shall€appoint€from€aÏlist€of€three€chosen€by€the€Commission€created€by€theÏAct.ÌÌÌà8 àà àThe€purpose€of€the€statute€as€expressed€in€itsÏpreamble€is€"to€assist€the€governor€in€finding€andÏappointing€the€best€qualified€persons€available€forÏservice€on€the€appellate€courts€of€Tennessee€and€toÏelect€the€best€qualified€persons€to€said€courts;€toÏinsulate€the€justices€and€judges€of€said€courts€freeÏfrom€political€influence€and€pressure;€to€improve€theÏadministration€of€justice;€to€enhance€the€prestige€ofÏand€respect€for€the€appellate€courts€by€eliminating€theÏnecessity€of€political€activities€by€appellate€justicesÏand€judges;€and€to€make€the€appellate€courts€ofÏTennessee€ððnonpolitical.ðð"ÌÌÌà8 àà àAll€of€these€provisions€of€the€Act,€it€now€seemsÏto€us,€derive€from€the€general€powers€of€theÏLegislature€and,€with€particular€reference€to€the€powerÏto€fill€vacancies€in€public€office,€from€the€expressÏprovisions€of€Article€7,€Section€4€and,€since€none€ofÏthem€is€either€directly€or€by€necessary€implicationÏcontrary€to€the€Constitution,€the€Act€is€constitutionalÏand€valid.ÌÌÌà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌÌà8 àà àThe€attack€on€the€statute€.€.€.€is€based€entirelyÏon€the€insistence€that€the€voting€provided€for€.€.€.€isÏnot€an€election€within€the€requirements€of€Article€6,ÏSection€3,€and€Article€7,€Section€5€of€ourÏConstitution.ÌÌÌà8 àà àThe€Constitution€of€Tennessee€does€not€define€theÏwords,€"elect",€"elective",€or€"elected"€and€we€haveÏnot€found€nor€have€we€been€referred€to€any€provision€ofÏthe€Constitution€or€of€a€statute€or€to€any€decision€ofÏone€of€our€appellate€courts€defining€these€words.ÌÌÌà8 àà àThere€are€three€instances€which€the€constitutionÏprovides€for€referenda€and€refers€to€them€as€elections:ÌÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌÌà8 àà àIt€seems€to€us€that€if€the€Constitution€itselfÏdenominates€these€methods€of€ratification€as€elections,Ïit€cannot€be€that€Chapter€198€[the€Modified€MissouriÏPlan]€is€unconstitutional€because€the€elections€thereinÏprovided€for€are€limited€to€approval€or€disapproval.€ÏSo€are€the€elections€provided€in€Sections€of€theÏConstitution€referred€to€above.€€This€is€particularlyÏthe€case,€since€Article€7,€Section€4€reposes€wideÏdiscretion€in€the€Legislature€with€respect€to€electionsÏand€the€filling€of€vacancies.ÌÌÌ496€S.W.2d€at€487„89.ÌÌÌÓÓà@ à„11„Çà àA€special€supreme€court,€dealing€directly€with€theÏconstitutionality€of€the€Tennessee€Plan,€upheld€it€in€theseÏwords:ÌÓÓà8 àThus,€it€being€the€duty€of€this€court,€if€there€is€aÏdoubt€as€to€the€meaning€of€the€Constitution€or€aÏseeming€conflict,€".€.€.€to€harmonize€such€portions€andÏfavor€the€construction€which€will€render€every€wordÏoperative€.€.€.,"€òòShelby€County€v.€Haleóó,€200€Tenn.€503,Ï292€S.W.2d€745€(1956),€this€Court€holds€that€the€yes/noÏretention€vote€provided€for€in€the€Tennessee€Plan€is€inÏcompliance€with€Article€VI,€Section€3€mandate€of€theÏTennessee€Constitution€that€Judges€of€the€Supreme€CourtÏbe€"elected€by€the€qualified€voters."€€No€authority€wasÏcited€by€any€party€to€these€proceedings,€nor€has€anyÏbeen€found€by€this€Court,€that€would€dictate€aÏdifferent€result€under€the€United€States€Constitution€.Ï.€..ÌÌòòHooker€v.€Thompsonóó,€òòsupraóó,€slip€op.€at€4,5.ÌÌÓÓÌà àIn€fairness€to€the€trial€judge,€she€recognized€theÏapplication€of€these€Supreme€Court€decisions€to€the€case€at€bar,Ïbut€she€based€her€finding€of€unconstitutionality€upon€theÏperception€that€"it€drastically€limits€the€group€of€persons€whoÏcan€become€appellate€judges€and€virtually€insures€the€name€of€theÏincumbent€on€the€ballot€thereby€eliminating€the€right€containedÏin€Article€VI,€section€4€for€appellate€judges€to€be€ððelected€byÏthe€qualified€votersðð."ÌÌà àWe€do€not€find€that€the€Tennessee€Plan€drastically€limitsÏthe€group€of€persons€who€can€become€appellate€judges.€€There€areÏthe€same€number€of€seats.€€Whether€the€ultimate€holders€goÏthrough€a€screening€as€previously€necessary€by€the€executiveÏcommittee€of€a€political€party,€or€participate€in€a€partyÏprimary,€or€run€for€office€as€an€independent€candidate,€only€oneÍperson€can€hold€each€office.€€The€Tennessee€Plan€does€not€reduceÏthe€number€of€persons€who€can€become€appellate€judges.€€It€simplyÏstructures€an€application€procedure€designed€to€insure€theÏquality€of€the€judges€while€minimizing€the€politics€of€theÏprocess.ÌÌà àThe€Modified€Missouri€Plan€did,€in€fact,€insure€that€theÏincumbent€was€on€the€ballot.€That€plan€was€held€to€beÏconstitutional.€€The€Tennessee€Plan€contains€requirements€thatÏtheÌÌà@ à„12„Çincumbent€must€have€served€satisfactorily€in€order€to€be€on€theÏballot.€€This€eliminates€the€automatic€right€to€be€on€the€ballot,Ïand€impacts€against€the€complaint€of€exclusivity€expressed.ÌÌà àWe€also€reject€the€trial€court's€suggestion€that€the€SupremeÏCourt€in€òòHigginsóó€and€òòHookeróó€was€limiting€its€approval€of€judicialÏretention€elections€under€Article€VI€to€elections€"filling€aÏvacancy".€€The€language€of€the€opinion€is€quite€clear€that€theÏintent€was€to€approve€the€entire€process€envisioned€by€theÏTennessee€Plan.ÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€that€the€TennesseeÏPlan€does€not€violate€Article€XI,€Section€8€of€the€TennesseeÏConstitution€or€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€the€United€StateÏConstitution.ÌÌà àThe€contention€that€the€plaintiff's€rights€under€theÏFourteenth€Amendment€were€violated€by€the€passage€of€theÏTennessee€Plan€was€correctly€addressed€by€the€trial€judge,€whoÏfound€that€the€subject€legislation€is€not€class€€legislationÏqualifying€for€equal€protection.ÌÌà àEven€if€it€were€found€that€the€Tennessee€Plan€constitutesÏclass€legislation€for€purposes€of€either€Article€XI,€section€8,Ïor€the€Equal€Protection€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€theÏUnited€States€Constitution,€there€is€still€no€violation.€€The€lawÏis€that€unless€a€classification€involves€a€suspect€class€or€aÍfundamental€right,€then€all€that€is€necessary€to€satisfy€theÏrequirements€of€equal€protection€is€that€there€be€a€rationalÏbasis€for€the€classification.€€òòMcGowan€v.€Marylandóó,€366€U.S.€420,Ï426,€81€S.€Ct.€1101,€1105,€6€L.€Ed.€2d€393,€399€(1961).€€There€isÏundoubtedly€a€rational€basis€for€treating€appellate€court€judgesÏdifferently€than€other€public€officials€for€purposes€of€theÏmanner€in€which€they€are€elected.ÌÌà@ à„13„Ìà àThe€appellee€is€not€a€member€of€a€suspect€class.€€It€hasÏbeen€held€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€that€there€is€noÏfundamental€right€to€hold€or€run€for€public€office.€€òòBullock€v.ÏCarteróó,€405€U.S.€134,€142„43,€92€S.€Ct.€849,€855,€31€L.€Ed.€2d€92Ï(1972).€€To€the€same€end€are€the€holdings€in€òòCity€of€Akron€v.ÏBellóó,€660€F.€2d€166€(6th€Cir.€1981)€and€òòCivil€Service€Merit€BoardÏv.€Bursonóó,€816€S.W.€2d€725,€733€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àThe€trial€judge€correctly€ruled€that€the€election€of€judgesÏto€the€Court€of€Appeals€by€the€voters€of€the€state€at€large€isÏconstitutional.€€The€court€involved€statewide€jurisdiction.€ÏThere€is€only€one€court€of€Appeals€in€Tennessee.€€The€requirementÏof€Article€VI,€section€4,€that€the€judges€be€elected€from€theirÏ"district"€or€"circuit",€in€this€instance€means€the€entire€state.ÏòòSeeóó€T.C.A.€Sec.€16„4„113,€114.ÌÌà àThe€appellee's€contention€that€the€Tennessee€Plan€is€illegalÏfor€the€alleged€voiding€of€a€general€law€was€correctly€overruledÍby€the€trial€court,€since€the€general€law€claimed€to€have€beenÏvoided€is€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€As€the€trial€court€held,Ïonly€a€statute€and€not€a€constitutional€provision€is€a€"generalÏlaw"€in€the€technical€sense.€€òòCivil€Service€Merit€Board€v.ÏBursonóó,€816€S.W.€2d€725€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àThe€appellee€contends€that€the€general€law€for€the€electionÏof€Tennessee€Court€of€Appeals€judges€is€contained€in€Art.€VI,Ïsection€4,€of€the€state€constitution;€and€that€the€Tennessee€PlanÏsuspends€the€general€law.€€This€claim€is€premised€upon€theÏcontention€that€said€section€does€not€permit€retention€elections.€ÏThis€position€has€been€squarely€met€and€overruled€in€òòHigginsóó€andÏòòHookeróó.ÌÌà àThe€final€contention€of€Mr.€DeLaney€is€that€the€reversedÏseverability€clause€contained€in€chapter€942,€section€23,€of€the€ÌÌà@ à„14„Ìsubject€Act€has€been€triggered€and€that€the€entire€Act€therebyÏvoided.Ìà àÌà àThe€trial€court€succinctly€and€correctly€held€that€theÏvoiding€clause€had€not€been€triggered,€"because€no€court€has€heldÏthe€Plan€itself€to€be€invalid€or€held€its€application€to€beÏinvalid."ÌÌà@ àòòCONCLUSIONÌÌóóà àIt€is€central€to€note€that€it€is€the€General€Assembly€thatÏcontrols€the€details€of€how€qualified€persons€become€judges.€€TheÏLegislature,€in€its€wisdom,€has€enacted€the€Tennessee€Plan.€€ItÏcan€change€it.€€It€is€not€for€this€court€to€judge€its€merits,€butÏonly€its€constitutionality.ÌÌà àThere€are€no€perfect€judges,€nor€any€perfect€way€for€theirÏselection.ÌÌà àThe€veteran€judges€making€up€this€special€court€have€servedÏas€judges€at€various€times€and€places€by€every€procedure€known€toÏthe€law:€appointment,€election,€interchange,€retention,€litigantÏselection,€bar€election€and€special€designation.ÌÌà àOur€only€bias€is€to€follow€our€oath€to€administer€justiceÏwithout€respect€to€persons,€and€do€equal€rights€to€the€poor€andÏthe€rich,€and€faithfully€and€impartially€discharge€all€the€dutiesÏincumbent€upon€us€as€judges,€to€the€best€of€our€abilities.€ÏT.C.A.€Sec.€17„2„120.ÌÌà àIt€is€our€judgment€that€the€Tennessee€Plan€isÏconstitutional.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court,€to€the€extentÏthat€it€holds€otherwise,€is€reversed.€€The€suit€is€dismissed.€ÏCosts€on€appeal€are€assessed€to€the€appellee.ÌÌà@ à„15„ÌÌÓÓÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÏWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóJOE€D.€DUNCAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ à„16„Ì