NASHVILLE, Tenn. — In a significant ruling with implications for local governance across Tennessee, the Tennessee Court of Appeals has partially upheld a lower court's decision that struck down a controversial state law restructuring the governing board of the Nashville airport authority.
At the center of the case is the 2023 Tennessee Public Acts, Chapter 488—a state law that forced the removal of Nashville International Airport Authority’s (MNAA) board and established a new appointment structure. The law gave appointment power to both state and local officials, notably reducing the influence of Nashville’s mayor. The new board also received broad powers, including authority over eminent domain and land use.
The law applied only to Davidson County, which encompasses Nashville, due to its specific population and government structure criteria—raising constitutional concerns under the Tennessee Constitution’s “Home Rule Amendment,” which bars the legislature from passing local laws without local approval.
Metro Nashville sued Governor Bill Lee and other state officials, arguing the law unfairly targeted Nashville in violation of the Home Rule Amendment, the state constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, and the “Anti-Ripper Clause,” which prohibits laws that remove local officials from office prematurely.
Trial Court’s Decision - In October 2023, a specially convened three-judge trial court ruled that Section 2 of the law, which replaced Nashville's airport board, was unconstitutional under the Home Rule and Anti-Ripper clauses. The court also found that Sections 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9 violated equal protection by treating MNAA differently from other airport authorities without a rational basis. It struck those sections from the law.
Appeals Court Ruling - On appeal, the Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that Section 2 is unconstitutional under the Home Rule Amendment. The appeals court agreed that the law was local in effect and improperly targeted Davidson County without a local referendum or approval.
However, the court reversed the lower court’s finding that Sections 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9 violated the state’s equal protection clause. The appellate judges found that those provisions did not rise to the level of constitutional discrimination and reinstated them—except for Section 2, which remains void.
Impact and Next Steps - The decision preserves Nashville's authority over its airport board, at least for now. However, other parts of the law expanding state authority over airport operations remain in effect, potentially reshaping how Tennessee manages transportation infrastructure in the future.
The ruling is a partial victory for both sides: Metro Nashville maintains its airport board autonomy, while the state retains broader influence over airport regulations through the reinstated provisions.
It is not yet clear whether either side will appeal the decision to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Background
During legislative debates, lawmakers admitted the law was crafted specifically for the Nashville airport due to its high profile and significant state and federal funding—over $29 million from the state and $26 million from the federal government in fiscal year 2022 alone.
Critics argued the law was politically motivated, targeting Nashville after tensions between the Republican-dominated legislature and the Democratic-controlled city government escalated over other local issues, including the rejection of a 2024 Republican National Convention bid.
Conclusion - While the court has settled part of the legal fight over the state's intervention in Nashville’s airport authority, the broader conflict over local vs. state control continues to simmer in Tennessee politics.
