Tennessee attorney general Jonathan Skrmetti, left photo, gives a press conference after a hearing on student athletics in federal court in Greeneville. Coty Wamp, right photo, is district attorney for Hamilton county and the 11th judicial district. (Photos YouTube, Wamp Facebook page)
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn., Friday, Sept. 6, 2024 — I have been working on a public service project to bring district attorney Coty “Coyote” Wamp into line, and today celebrate a vital input.
By David Tulis
The attorney general on Thursday sends me a citation that will help land my complaint in the right place for best effect.
An inquiry with the office of Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti on Aug. 30 brings a response six days later with citation to Tenn. const. Art. 6, sect. 6 and a court case that will let my study of law and liberty to bear fruit.
The case is Ramsey v. Bd. of Professional Responsibility of Supreme Court of Tennessee 771 S.W. 2d 116, decided in 1989, that says a district attorney can be removed from office only by impeachment, a function of the general assembly.
“As a result, ouster is not permissible,” says Scott C. Sutherland, senior deputy attorney general in the civil law section of the department. “Therefore, we respectfully decline your request” for assistance.
The ouster law at Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-47-101 et seq outlines which parties may sue to remove people in office. Upon only some officeholders can citizens by committee oust a public official for “knowingly or willfully [committing] misconduct in office, or who shall knowingly or willfully neglect to perform any duty enjoined upon such officer.”
The grievance against Miss Wamp must be conceived not as ouster, but as a bar grievance heard by the board of professional responsibility. The BPR regulates and supervises attorney conduct under the rules of professional responsibility. Lawyers have a high standard of conduct as they are officers of the court.
The Tennessee supreme court licenses attorneys, who are bound by their ethics rules to uphold dignity of the court system and maintain public confidence in courts by staying within the law.
Miss Wamp has acted under color of office to abrogate four guarantees in the Tennessee bill of rights. The board has power to disbar, suspend or otherwise reprimand an attorney for a breach of ethics or law.
Says the Ramsey court, “Appellant argues that under the Tennessee Constitution, judges and district attorneys are treated identically and Article VI, Section 6 ordains a single and exclusive method of removal — impeachment by the Legislature. We agree that the exclusive method of removal from office for judgesand district attorneys is by impeachment. However, this does not mean that district attorneys and judges are not subject to discipline.”
Ouster option off table
This letter — delivered speedily by the Tennessee attorney general’s office — gives an important clue about how to proceed in efforts to chastise DA Coty Wamp for her work to abrogate constitutional rights.
She should be removed on the grounds that she is allowing the government of Chattanooga to implement UN 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development, UN Agenda 21, Net Zero which violate Pub. Ch. 479.
This law forbids the implementation of these UN agendas and from taking or paying out money in support of these agendas. We all know that Chattanooga has worked with the WEF in the past (perhaps they still are?), they paid dues for 4 years to ICLEI (local agency that implements Agenda 21 locally), setting up Chattanooga to be a 15-Minute City and a park city based off of a program created in the UK. Chattanooga was one of the original 19 beta sites for UN Agenda 21.
The people of Chattanooga need to get a lawyer and demand that Ms. Wamp take action against the government of Chattanooga.
They have the right to do so under Pub. Ch. 877 (this law was written to put some teeth into Pub. Ch. 479)