The case of "DeLaney v. Thompson" challenged the statute once more, in 1998. The plaintiffs argued that the process was not an "election" in the sense envisioned by the authors of the state constitution, and that the court in "Higgins v. Dunn" had been incompetent to render a decision because of its interest in the outcome of the case. "DeLaney v. Thompson" was appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court, which, if it had not recused itself in the case of "Higgins v. Dunn", recused itself altogether and entirely now. The Governor appointed five temporary replacements to hear this case. That body declined to rule on the constitutionality of the Tennessee Plan, but rather remanded the case on a technicality.