The Fourth Annual John Lewis Way March will be held July 19 beginning at 8 a.m. CDT at the corner of John Lewis Way and Jefferson Street in Nashville and end with a performance outside the National Museum of African American Music on Broadway. Evening activities will include a reception at 5 p.m., followed by a panel discussion. Visit the event website for more information.

Tennessee’s Flex Loan law, passed in 2014, has allowed high-interest lenders to trap borrowers in cycles of debt through repeated reborrowing, despite earlier state laws banning such practices for payday loans, a new report concludes. In a joint reporting project between Tennessee Lookout and ProPublica, borrowers described being encouraged through frequent emails and mailers to borrow back almost all of their loan payments, leading to ballooning debts and eventual lawsuits, even after paying far more than they initially borrowed. Critics argue the Flex Loan law’s structure enables predatory lending with interest rates effectively reaching over 279% while avoiding federal oversight. The reporting also found that despite complaints, regulatory responses have been minimal and lenders have continued aggressive collection tactics.

The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) has announced it will try Kilmar Abrego Garcia on federal human smuggling charges in Tennessee before pursuing deportation to a third country, not his native El Salvador, according to the Associated Press. Abrego Garcia's attorneys, concerned he could be swiftly deported before trial, have asked U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland to intervene and have him transferred there while awaiting court proceedings. Abrego Garcia — who has lived in Maryland for more than a decade, was deported to El Salvador in March and brought back to the states in June — has denied gang ties and pleaded not guilty to charges stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. Nashville-based U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes has ruled for his conditional release pending trial, but yesterday delayed release due to concerns that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would deport him before trial.

California legal scholar Eugene Volokh has filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging Tennessee’s law that limits public records access to state residents. After being denied court records by the Williamson County Archives due to his California residency, Volokh argues the restriction violates his rights under the First Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities Clause. His suit contends that court records are essential for his academic research and that denying access based on residency is an unjust barrier. Although the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a similar Virginia law, Volokh asserts his case is different because it involves constitutional, not merely statutory, rights. The Nashville Banner has the story.

The next free advice clinic for Black-owned small businesses and nonprofits is set for July 17 in Nashville.  The clinic, sponsored by the Arts & Business Council's Volunteer Lawyers & Professionals for the Arts and Bradley, provides assistance with business formation and corporate governance, review of contracts and guidance in navigating local ordinances and state regulations. Prospective clients should register by July 14. Attorneys should email vlpa@abcnashville.org to volunteer.

Ashland City’s Cheatham Middle School got a new mascot. Previously known at the “Bearcats,” the Middle Tennessee school changed mascots because of a cease-and-desist letter it received from the University of Cincinnati. Andrew Coffman explains why the change was necessary and the ins and outs of trademark and copyright law.

The TBA Law Office Technology & Management Section is presenting four webcasts in July. On July 8, catch “60 Legal Tech Tips, Tricks, Gadgets and Websites in 60 Minutes, which will focus on the latest developments in legal technology. On July 9, tune in for “AI in Law: Use Cases,” which will explore 30 impactful use cases of generative AI for lawyers, including in the areas of legal research, document drafting and practice management. On July 10, join colleagues for “The Evolving Ethics of Law Firm Cybersecurity: Practical and Budget-Friendly Tips.” This program will focus on affordable cybersecurity measures that should be considered to protect confidential data. And on July 11, wrap up with “Our Era of AI: Responsible AI & Microsoft Copilot,” which will look at how Microsoft embraces Responsible AI in its development of AI solutions and how the company’s legal department uses Copilot to achieve more.

In this edition of Voices of the YLD, Brian Mounce interviews Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. Skrmetti offers the following advice for young lawyers: find an area of law you love, find some mentors and keep at it; things will be here long after we are gone, so have a good work life balance, too. Mounce is an attorney at Burch, Porter & Johnson. He received his law degree from Tulane University and Master of Science degree from the London School of Economics. Previously he served as an assistant federal defender and an assistant solicitor general in the Tennessee Attorney General's Office. Mounce is TBA YLD's Publications Committee chair. Contact him if you are interested in submitting a piece for Voices of the YLD.

As a first-year associate in a debt finance practice, one of the first major documents I encountered was the credit agreement. While dense and highly technical at first glance, this document is central to any lending relationship and worth understanding, even for lawyers outside of the finance world. It governs the legal and financial relationship between a borrower and its lender and sets the tone for the entire financing deal.

At its core, a credit agreement is a contract between a borrower and a lender (or group of lenders) that outlines the terms and conditions by which the borrower can access funds. It is typically drafted by lender’s counsel and negotiated with borrower’s counsel, and governs the rights, responsibilities and obligations of all parties involved. A credit agreement can range from 50 to over 150 pages and often includes schedules, exhibits and ancillary documents like security agreements and guarantees. Despite the complexity, most credit agreements follow a relatively standard structure, including definitions, loan terms, conditions precedent, representations and warranties, covenants, events of default, remedies and miscellaneous provisions.

One of the first things I learned about the credit agreement was just how powerful the definitions section is. Practically every material business or legal term is defined here, and those definitions can greatly change how the agreement operates. Take EBITDA for example – what may seem like a straightforward accounting concept could be negotiated to include various add-backs and exclusions that affect how the financial covenants are calculated, and, in turn, whether a borrower is in default. Further, concepts like “Permitted Liens” and “Change of Control” should be carefully tailored to the borrower’s structure and business practices to avoid default later down the line.

Another key component of the credit agreement is the covenants. Covenants are one of the most negotiated parts of a credit agreement. They list what the borrower must do (affirmative), must not do (negative) or must maintain (financial) throughout the life of the loan. Affirmative covenants typically include requirements to deliver financial statements, maintain insurance, comply with various laws and maintain corporate existence. Conversely, negative covenants can restrict the borrower from incurring additional debt, granting additional liens on the pledged collateral (excluding Permitted Liens), or transferring assets, among other things. Finally, financial covenants are key performance benchmarks that the borrower must meet on an ongoing basis. They can include concepts like minimum liquidity, coverage ratios and leverage ratios, and are commonly tested on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis. Ultimately, the covenants are there to give the lender control or visibility into the borrower’s financial health and risk. Flexibility can be negotiated through baskets, thresholds or exceptions. For junior associates, understanding how these covenants interact, especially with the defined terms and financial schedules, is an important early skill.

Further, every credit agreement includes a section detailing what happens when the borrower is in breach of the agreement — called “Events of Default.” Default may be triggered by things like failure to pay principal or interest, breach of a covenant, misrepresentation, insolvency or other bankruptcy events, cross-defaults of other key agreements, or change of control. The credit agreement provides for various lender remedies, allowing the lender to accelerate payments, charge default interest or exercise its rights under the collateral documents in the event of a default. Cure periods, notice requirements and materiality qualifiers are critical to this section — borrowers want time and flexibility, whereas lenders want clarity and speed.

Credit agreements appear across the business law landscape — in M&A deals, real estate closings, restructurings and even in-house legal departments assessing a company’s financial health. For junior associates, developing a working familiarity with these documents early on is a valuable differentiator. It enables you to spot issues that may impact your client’s broader strategy, understand how lender rights can influence corporate actions and collaborate more effectively with finance counsel. While credit agreements can be dense and highly technical, they are also logical and structured, making them excellent training grounds for junior lawyers. You don’t need to master every provision at once, but by focusing on the big picture and staying curious about the details, you’ll build fluency over time. With each deal, you’ll become more comfortable with the language, better at identifying negotiation leverage and increasingly confident in your ability to add value to both your team and your clients.

Adriana Snedaker is an associate in the Bass, Berry & Sims PLC debt finance practice, representing borrowers and lenders in financing transactions, including acquisition and construction loans, term loan facilities, asset-based secured financings and revolving credit facilities. Snedaker also collaborates with the firm’s Corporate & Securities Practice Group on corporate transactions, such as mergers and acquisitions, for public and private companies, which involve financing issues.

GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge. The State of Michigan collects blood samples from newborn babies and screens them for diseases as part of its newborn screening program. This program is not unique. Every state has one, and more than 98% of children born in the United States are tested at birth. These programs are estimated to have saved thousands of infant lives across the country. However laudable any government program may be, it must withstand the rigors of constitutional scrutiny. Plaintiffs—four parents and their nine children who were born in Michigan and had their heels pricked and blood drawn as part of the newborn screening program—contend that Michigan’s scheme entails coercive, non-consensual taking and keeping of baby blood for the state’s profit, in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The district court initially dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint, but a prior panel of our court reversed and remanded several claims. Kanuszewski v. Mich. Dep’t of Health & Hum. Servs., 927 F.3d 396 (6th Cir. 2019) (Kanuszewski I). Ultimately, the district court granted judgment in plaintiffs’ favor on nearly all their remaining claims and ordered defendants to return or destroy plaintiffs’ stored blood spots and data collected under the program. Doing so was erroneous because the district court over-extended our prior opinion’s holdings and failed to apply the law to the facts as developed during discovery. We therefore reverse the district court’s judgment in plaintiffs’ favor on all Fourteenth and Fourth Amendment claims and vacate the injunction requiring defendants to destroy the stored data.