Sheriff Austin Garrett, left, holds a press confeence at the jail in which he caged me Nov. 22, 2023, for traveling in an automobile with a slightly damaged taillight. (Photo HCSO)
This is the first page of my filing with my unprecedented 6th circuit filing demanding an end to criminal enforcement of traffic stops on grounds of the duty of the state to exhaust administrative remedies under the uniform administrative procedures act.
It costs me F$21.25 at the Soddy-Daisy post office to put my brief to the 6th circuit court of appeals Monday, July 7 2025, in my suit against Hamilton County and Sheriff Austin Garrett for their longstanding abuse and fraud against users of the public roads by misuse of criminal, peacekeeping authority. (Photo David Tulis)
My fight to undo a dismissal by U.S. district court judge Travis McDonough includes an extensive appendix of Tennessee and federal law, showing that private use of the roads has never been the object of regulation under the privilege. This work is Christian ministry rescuing the oppressed, one not yet funded by local churches and charity orgs. (Photo David Tulis)
With no warrant, Brandon Bennett, a Hamilton County, Tenn., sheriff’s deputy, gets set to arrest me exercising my right of ingress and egress from my house, obstructing the public road as if he were a bandit. (Photo David Tulis)
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn., Saturday, July 12, 2025 – A radio reporter who says traffic stops are the most powerful extension of Jim Crow abuse upon the weak and poor is forcing Hamilton County to defend traffic stops before the U.S. court of appeals in the 6th circuit.
The county has 30 days to file an answer to David Tulis’ attack on traffic stops that he says illegally let sheriff Austin Garret use criminal enforcement authority to criminalize technical auto glitches and misdoings under driver licenses when the law requires Department of Safety and Homeland Security to administer grievances under the motor vehicle privilege.
Tulis sued in U.S. district court over deputy Brandon Bennett’s Nov. 22, 2023, arrest and jailing him for a damaged taillight on 1999 Toyota RAV4. The judicial reform activist and busy pro se litigator insists that he is defending state law’s privilege system, which makes driving and operating a motor vehicle a privilege.
“All occupational privilege,” he said, “whether plumbing, embalming, hairdressing or scrap metal dealing are handled administratively by the licensing authority, not armed deputies jackbooting it through the hair salon making charges about comb sanitation or jerking the accountant out from behind his desk for a misstep under his license.
In a nutshell ——————————
— Attack on longstanding abuse part focuses on criminal police power vs. regulatory powers
— Case is first of its kind, arguing rights under privilege
Tulis’ 13,000 word filing with the appeals court in Cincinnati this week says it is illegal to use criminal, peacekeeping, preserver of the peace authority when the motor vehicle laws establish procedures for any grievance the state may have against a licensee.
“Sheriff Garrett and his deputies love swinging their criminal enforcement powers around and injuring people with criminal prosecution, ruining many innocent drivers and travelers, especially among the poor,” Tulis said. “If he is going to administer the motor vehicle laws, he is going to have to do that through the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act. The people of Hamilton County have had enough violence, arrests, jailings and abuse under color of traffic enforcement.”
“My suit has no precedent. Petitioners in other cases all waived the issue of how privilege is administered. I’m arguing that Bennet is personally liable to me because I have a right for the state of Tennessee to exhaust its administrative remedies rather than resorting to cages and criminal prosecution for a blinkered taillight and suchlike.”
Filings available at https://davidtulis.substack.com/p/6th-circuit-appeal-shows-traffic
Service copy – Tulis v. Bennett Appellate Brief — how UAPA is your friend in your traffic case
Service copy – Tulis v. Bennett Appendix 1 of 2 — from 1905 onward, all regulation commercial
Service copy – Tulis v. Bennett Appendix 2 of 2 — laws show ‘sov cits’ probably correct on travel rights
David runs a personal nonprofit fighting and mercy ministry. He thanks you for checks sent directly to c/o 10520 Brickhill Lane, Soddy-Daisy, TN 37379. Also at GiveSendGo.
