Abuses, Injuries, and Usurpations: Stifling the Consent of the Governed in Memphis
Daniel Kiel[*]
- Introduction
In this year of commemorations of the Declaration of Independence’s 250th anniversary, much attention has been paid to the Declaration’s ideals about self-evident truths and inalienable rights. Most of the text of the Declaration is a full-throated indictment of tyranny. The twenty-seven enumerated grievances of the Americans document the wholesale removal of self-determination in the colonies, including through interference with the creation of laws by local legislative bodies and the presence of occupying forces of intimidation.[1] In the face of such oppressions, the colonists declared their right to rid themselves of tyranny.
If tyranny is defined by the removal of self-determination, Memphians living through this year’s commemorations may find themselves identifying powerfully with the Founders who so carefully spelled out their accusations that the “direct object” of those holding power was to establish “an absolute tyranny.” In the twelve months between July 4, 2025, and July 4, 2026, Memphians have seen local law enforcement taken over and amplified by state and federal forces, including the National Guard; a locally-elected school board superseded by a newly-created state-imposed body; and their congressional districts divided in a transparent effort to dilute Memphians’ electoral voice. The cumulative effect of these “repeated injuries and usurpations” is the same as that spelled out by the Founders—disenfranchisement in flagrant violation of the right to self-determination.
In 2026, Memphians find themselves with virtually no political voice. Local legislative bodies have seen their enactments overridden by the state, either through direct nullification of local action or by supplanting local control with state power. Within the Tennessee General Assembly, representatives from Memphis find themselves in an extreme minority with little power to pass or even influence legislation. And recent efforts to redistrict the state’s federal congressional districts could silence Memphians’ voice in Congress. As a result, Memphians’ agency in their pursuit of happiness has been severely eroded. What is happening in Memphis is a warning for the nation.
But it is more than that. While Memphians may be uniquely politically vulnerable in this highly partisan moment, disenfranchisement of segments of Americans has been a consistent feature of the past 250 years, despite the Declaration’s egalitarian ideals. The autonomy of many has been legally curtailed in countless ways: often along lines of race, sex, ethnicity, and other demographic characteristics. The disenfranchisement of Memphis is, not coincidentally, also the disenfranchisement of one of the nation’s largest majority-Black cities. In this way, it fits within a long line of tyrannies that have restricted the autonomy of African Americans and have fiercely resisted Black political power.
This Essay seeks to zoom both in and out to capture the plight Memphis is facing. It does so by documenting the three most significant recent actions removing Memphians’ self-determination: the imposition of an aggressive state and federal law enforcement task force, the supplanting of the locally-elected school board, and the slicing up of the city via unprecedented redistricting.[2] Each of these actions justifies more detailed evaluation on its own. But the effort here is also to zoom out by tying them together as part of a broader effort disenfranchising Memphians and a longer history subjugating African Americans. Like the Declaration itself, this Essay is a call to action,[3] both for Memphians to organize in the face of legalized disenfranchisement and for others disturbed by this theft of agency and for whom this form of tyranny may yet come.
In many ways, what is happening in Memphis exemplifies a contemporary evolution of anti-democratic (but nominally legal) tendencies that represent the nation’s most significant failure to embrace the Declaration’s ideal of equality.[4] The Declaration identified the role of government as securing the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”[5] On this 250th anniversary, Memphis serves as a cautionary tale for what can happen when the consent of the governed is disregarded. It thus represents a key battle in the persistent fight to establish a truly representative democracy.
[*] FedEx Professor of Law, The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law. The author thanks the members of The University of Memphis Law Review for their vision in creating this new outlet for legal scholarship and commentary, the opportunity to contribute, and the work so many have put in to bring this Essay together. In addition, the author acknowledges and honors the many Memphians and others who continue to fight to ensure that the city’s voice is heard.
[1]. The Declaration of Independence para. 2 (U.S. 1776).
[2]. In addition to these direct interferences with local autonomy, Memphians are also confronting potentially existential threats to their environment, including the city’s water supply. See generally Lauryn Carr, From Primacy to Poison: The Structural Betrayal of the Safe Drinking Water Act When Silence Becomes Policy, U. Mem. Blog Rev. (forthcoming 2026) (examining the threat data centers pose to Memphis’ sand aquifer and how the Safe Drinking Water Act will likely fail to prevent xAI from contaminating Memphis’ drinking water). Notably, this Essay does not directly deal with aggressive immigration enforcement in this moment or attempt to unpack the full complexity of historic struggles with police and community violence, educational inequality, economic disempowerment, or other dynamics that contribute to a sense of tyranny.
[3]. This is something about the Declaration of Independence that is often overlooked. It is as much an argument to other Americans emphasizing the urgency of pushing back as it is a declaration of independence aimed at the British. See Harrison W. Mark, Declaration of Independence, in World Hist. Encyclopedia (Apr. 3, 2024), https://www.worldhistory.org/article/2411/declaration-of-independence/ (on file with the University of Memphis Law Review) (“[The Declaration of Independence] has been cited in the push for the abolition of slavery and in many civil rights movements, and it continues to be a rallying cry for human rights to this day.”). After all, it is not as though the British received the Declaration and simply agreed to American independence––it was something that had to be fought for with collective action and sacrifice. The Declaration of Independence was a rallying cry.
[4]. The American commitment to equality has long coexisted with the exclusion of Black Americans from meaningful political participation. See 2 Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America 215–25 (Henry Reeve trans., Cambridge, Sever & Francis 1863) (1840) (noting the glaring contradiction between America’s democratic ideals and the brutal reality of American racism and slavery); W. E. B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk 13–40 (Cambridge, McClurg & Co. 1903) (exploring how the promise of American freedom was withheld from Black citizens after the Civil War).
[5]. The Declaration of Independence para. 2 (U.S. 1776).