The Tennessee Attorney General said no in a Mar. 14 opinion (No. 14 opinion (No.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1306 against carrying weapons in buildings in which judicial proceedings are in progress may be reasonably construed to apply only to those buildings in which a judge customarily conducts judicial proceedings, such as courthouses and criminal justice facilities. The General Assembly did not intend Tenn. Code Ann.SS 39-17-1306 does not apply to buildings where a judge remotely conducts a judicial proceeding via conference call or videoconference. This could be the judge’s private residence, or any other similar structure. § 39-17-1306 to apply to buildings from which a judge conducts a judicial proceeding remotely by conference call or videoconference, such as the judge’s private residence or another similar building {[or] to other buildings such as private residences, business offices or other similar buildings from which non-judicial participants—e.g., attorneys or witnesses—might participate in judicial proceedings by conference call or videoconference.} …
First, “[t]He clearly intended to [Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1306]It is intended to provide safety for judges, legal personnel, trial witnesses and other observers in the courtroom, as well as to maintain proper decorum and conduct during the judicial proceeding. In other words, the intent is to protect people in courthouses—i.e., in buildings where their participation in judicial proceedings requires them to come into contact with others who may pose a risk if they are armed. But a lawyer or judge or witness participating in a judicial proceeding remotely from his or her own home or office does not face the risks associated with physical presence in courthouses, so there is no reason to extend the meaning of “building” to include buildings from which people are participating remotely….
Second, there are the exceptions [to the statute] evince a legislative intent to include only such buildings as courthouses and criminal justice facilities in which judicial proceedings are traditionally and customarily conducted, because those exemptions apply to officials and other persons who would only be in courthouses—namely, law enforcement officers, bailiffs, marshals, and other court officers who have “responsibility for protecting persons or property or providing security.”
The third was when Tenn. § 39-17-1306 was enacted in 1989, the commercial internet had not been developed, and remote participation in judicial proceedings was by no means commonplace. It is therefore unlikely that “buildings” was intended to mean buildings where people can participate in judicial proceedings remotely. If that had been the intention, the General Assembly would have and could have amended the statute to reflect the technology that allows remote participation. Contrary to popular belief, the statute was amended numerous times over the years, but none of these amendments indicate that the intent is to allow remote participation in judicial proceedings via conference call or videoconference.
Fourth, the constitutional doubt canon would render a court unable to interpret Tenn. Code Ann’s prohibition. § 39-17-1306 broadly to encompass private residences, since firearm possession there is protected by the Second Amendment. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1306 as applying only to those buildings in which a judge customarily conducts judicial proceedings, such as courthouses and criminal justice facilities, avoids constitutional conflict and safeguards Second Amendment rights. See D.C. v. Heller (2008) (“[N]othing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms … in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings ….”).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1306 against carrying weapons in buildings in which judicial proceedings are in progress may be reasonably construed to apply only to those buildings in which a judge customarily conducts judicial proceedings, such as courthouses and criminal justice facilities. The General Assembly did not intend Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1306 to apply to buildings from which a judge conducts a judicial proceeding remotely by conference call or videoconference, such as the judge’s private residence or another similar building.