Article by Senior Editor Heidi Woll
Introduction
A sweeping new immigration law in Tennessee has sparked a range of reactions from constituents. Some Tennesseans are supportive of the law’s broad dissent penalties, arguing that the law aligns with public security policies and seeks to enhance state and federal immigration enforcement cooperation. But many others are outraged. Opponents of the new law claim that, beyond being too harsh on undocumented migrants, the law unconstitutionally threatens local governance autonomy.
The New Law
There is no doubt that the new Tennessee immigration law is strict.
SB6002/HB6001 passed along party lines during Tennessee’s special session earlier this year and was signed into law by Tennessee Governor Bill Lee (“Governor Lee”) on February 12, 2025.[1] The legislation is thorough: It includes creating a Centralized Immigration Enforcement Division (CIEO), sets forth changes to state-issued IDs for noncitizens, and launches incentives for local governments to participate in federal law enforcement.
Among these changes to immigration law, which largely align the state’s immigration policies with Trump-era practices, the legislation introduces severe penalties for lawmakers who dissent from the policies advanced by the new law.[3] The bill was passed despite warnings from staff attorneys that the bill is “constitutionally suspect” in its unprecedented effort to curtail elected officials’ voting decisions.
Among other measures designed to crack down on illegal immigration, this new Tennessee law enacts several stricter measures that make it a felony for local government officials to vote in support of “sanctuary” policies protecting undocumented immigrants.
The controversial Tennessee legislation is in lockstep with, if not a step ahead of, the Trump administration’s measures weakening so-called sanctuary laws, which limit a local government’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Despite the Trump administration not explicitly directing states to take up any new policies at this time, Governor Lee and the GOP leadership in Tennessee have said the measures are necessary to help President Trump enforce his immigration policies.
Lawmakers on Both Sides of the Aisle Voiced their Opposition
Before the bill was passed, various Tennessee senators voiced their concerns about the bill. In particular, they took issue with the provision of the bill that criminalized lawmakers’ votes.[6]
In a Tennessee Senate Judiciary Committee meeting, Senator Todd Gardenhire proposed an amendment to Senate Bill 6002, which had sought to remove the penalties from the bill before it was passed.[7] When Senator Gardenhire (R-District 10) introduced the amendment, he argued that penalizing officials for voting their conscience would set a dangerous precedent.[8] “If we set a precedent of penalizing any elected official for voting their conscience, whether it’s good or bad, then we have sent a dangerous precedent to the future,”Senator Gardenhire said.[9]
Senator Gardenhire was in the minority among Republicans who dominate the Senate Judiciary Committee he chairs.[10] They quickly shot down Senator Gardenhire’s efforts to amend the bill to remove criminal penalties before voting to advance it in the legislature.[11] Senator Bo Watson (“Senator Watson”) (R-District 11), who presented the bill, strongly opposed the amendment, calling it “offensive.”[12] He noted the bill’s concentration on regulating undocumented immigration: “This is an attempt to remove a segment that doesn’t apply to gun rights, doesn’t apply to abortion rights, and to convolute that with other issues is just not an accurate representation of what this section of this act would do,” Senator Watson said.[13]
The ACLU’s Response
The American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) viewed the matter quite differently from the GOP supermajority. Soon after the immigration bill passed, the ACLU released a statement announcing that its attorneys were preparing to challenge it.[14] Advocates said that the portion of the bill that makes it illegal for local governments to enact “sanctuary city” rules and makes it a Class E felony to vote in favor of such policies is unconstitutional.[15]
“Threatening officials with felony charges and criminal prosecution based solely on how they vote raises significant constitutional concerns,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough.[16]
This Author’s Thoughts
This author has serious concerns about the broader implications of this bill. Policy opinions as to the treatment of undocumented migrants aside, the criminalization of certain public officials’ voting decisions is unprecedented. This author has been hard-pressed to find any similar laws in place today.
This law appears to blatantly violate the separation of powers principles upon which our Nation was founded. As Senator Gardenhire stated: “We are a Republic, and a Republic is one that we elect people to vote the way they feel like is best for the district, the city, county or the state.”[17]
This author will be following the ACLU’s anticipated constitutional challenge closely as it moves through the courts.
[1] SB 6002, https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=SB6002.
[2] Dan Gooding, Tennessee Bill Would Prohibit Voting Against Trump Immigration Policies, Newsweek (Jan. 30, 2025, 5:27 PM), https://www.newsweek.com/tennessee-bill-would-prohibit-voting-against-trump-immigration-policies-2023749.
[3] Id.
[4] Diana Leyva & Melissa Brown, Tennessee’s Immigration Law: From Criminalizing Support for Sanctuary Cities to New IDs, What GOP-Backed Bill Does, The Tennessean (Jan. 31, 2025, 12:57 PM), https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2025/01/31/tennessee-immigration-bill-trump-enforcement/78085231007/.
[5] Xavier Harris, Tennessee Senate Committee Debates Amendment on Sanctuary Cities Penalties, Loc. 3 News (Jan. 31, 2025), https://www.local3news.com/local-news/tennessee-senate-committee-debates-amendment-on-sanctuary-cities-penalties/article_f0c3fd28-de82-11ef-bd17-c7135f74b394.html.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Anita Wadhwani, Bill Criminalizing Votes for Immigrant Sanctuary Policies ‘Constitutionally Suspect’, Tenn. Lookout ( Jan. 29 2025, 5:02 AM), https://tennesseelookout.com/2025/01/29/bill-criminalizing-votes-for-immigrant-sanctuary-policies-constitutionally-suspect/.
[11] Id.
[12] Harris, supra note 5.
[13] Id.
[14] ACLU-TN Preparing Challenge to Anti-Immigrant Legislation, ACLU of Tenn. (Jan. 30, 2025), https://www.aclu-tn.org/en/press-releases/aclu-tn-preparing-challenge-anti-immigrant-legislation.
[15] Id.
[16] Leyva & Brown, supra note 4.
[17] Wadhwani, supra note 10.
Recent Comments