We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

As Tennessee’s attorney general for only two years, Republican Jonathan Skrmetti is racking up wins for conservatives in policy and law against the Biden-Harris administration and private sector actors. 

One of those successes looms at the U.S. Supreme Court, where in the term that begins Oct. 1 the justices are expected to take up the federal government’s attempt to kill a Tennessee law restricting gender transitions for children. 

In the case, called United States v. Jonathan Skrmetti, the high court will hear arguments and then decide whether the Tennessee law violates the Constitution in attempting to protect minors subjected to dangerous, life-altering medical procedures. 

“Twenty-five different states have enacted similar, and in some cases, identical laws,” Sarah Parshall Perry, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. 

The Tennessee ban is “very logical, very reasonable, and very constitutional,” Perry said, noting that Skrmetti is “working overtime to defend children.” 

The state law bans puberty blockers, hormones, and gender-transition surgeries for minors. 

In court filings, Skrmetti and other Tennessee officials argued that gender-reassignment surgery on minors has “exploded” in recent years and that these procedures are “unproven and risky.” 

Skrmetti, now 47, was sworn in as attorney general on Sept. 1, 2022. Married and the father of four, the Franklin resident previously was chief deputy attorney general under his predecessor, Herbert H. Slatery III, for three years.  

Skrmetti also was chief counsel to Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, a fellow Republican.    

“His reputation is really stellar,” Heritage’s Perry said of Skrmetti, calling him “an excellent attorney general who is highly revered.” 

Skrmetti received degrees from George Washington University, the University of Oxford, and Harvard Law School. 

Unlike in other states, Tennessee’s chief law enforcement officer is appointed by the state Supreme Court for an eight-year term, rather than elected by voters for a four-year term. (The office, whose official title is attorney general and reporter, is thus part of Tennessee’s judicial branch rather than its executive branch.) 

Aides and other admirers say that as attorney general, Skrmetti has spearheaded successful lawsuits against the federal government, especially leading the charge against gender ideology mandates and government overreach.  

Here’s a look at what they characterize as some of his biggest challenges and successes. 

1. Protecting Consumers  

Skrmetti’s duties as attorney general include protecting the state’s consumers, and supporters say he has risen to that task. 

Skrmetti filed a lawsuit against one of the world’s largest asset managers, BlackRock Inc., in a “first-of-its-kind” consumer protection case.  

Tennessee successfully sued BlackRock over misleading statements about its use of ESG standards (for environmental, social, and governance considerations) in investments. 

Ordinary shareholders argue that ESG standards elevate over “social justice” and other progressive causes over profitability and good business practices. 

2. Countering Gender Ideology  

Skrmetti has been at the forefront of battles with progressives over gender ideology, most notably foiling the Biden-Harris administration’s proposed Title IX changes.  

The administration’s adjustments would have mandated that biological boys be allowed to play girls sports at school and to use girls’ restrooms and locker rooms, among other things. 

Despite facing several challenges from the Biden-Harris Justice Department, Skrmetti successfully defended Tennessee’s ban on so-called gender-affirming care for children. This is the case pending at the U.S. Supreme Court.  

The attorney general also won a U.S. District Court case against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which sought to mandate that medical providers perform, and insurers cover, some sex-change procedures. 

Skrmetti also went to the District Court as well as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit to successfully defend Tennessee’s policy forbidding a change in the biological sex listed on birth certificates. 

(Office of the Tennessee Attorney General)

3. Combating Illegal Immigration  

Skrmetti also has had success in responding to the Biden-Harris administration’s undoing of border security measures imposed by the Trump-Pence administration.  

He sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border-related agencies, over its refusal to share records regarding the “catch and release” of illegal aliens who were transported to Tennessee.  

The case is called Tennessee v. Mayorkas, after DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, an appointee of President Joe Biden. 

4. Fighting for Life 

Early this year, Skrmetti successfully sued the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over its revised regulations implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. 

The agency’s revision would have forced employers to pay for their employees’ abortions, he argued.  

“I’m proud to lead the coalition fighting to protect the rule of law against this unconstitutional federal overreach,” Skrmetti said in a public statement. “Congress passed the bipartisan Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to protect mothers-to-be and promote healthy pregnancies, and the EEOC’s attempt to rewrite that law into an abortion mandate is illegal.” 

5. Opposing Racial Discrimination and DEI Policies 

When it comes to government and private sector policies focused on or mandating so-called DEI—diversity, equity, and inclusion—Skrmetti has been proactive in expressing concerns.  

The Tennessee attorney general last year co-led a 13-state letter that warned Fortune 100 companies about DEI practices setting up racial preferences in hiring, promotions, and other decisions. 

“As the Supreme Court recently emphasized, both our Constitution and our civil rights laws guarantee every American the right to be free from racial discrimination,” Skrmetti said in a press release.  

“The court’s reasoning means that companies, no matter their motivation, cannot treat people differently based on the color of their skin,” he said. “Corporate America continues to have many avenues to help disadvantaged people and communities of all races without resorting to crude racial line-drawing.