AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 73-15-3, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO INCLUDE ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSES IN THE STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF THE MISSISSIPPI NURSING PRACTICE LAW; TO AMEND SECTION 73-15-5, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO DELETE CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND REVISE CERTAIN DEFINITIONS IN THE NURSING PRACTICE LAW REGARDING ADVANCED NURSING PRACTICE; TO AMEND SECTION 73-15-9, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO REVISE THE COMPOSITION OF THE MISSISSIPPI BOARD OF NURSING TO INCLUDE A CERTIFIED REGISTERED NURSE ANESTHETIST AS A MEMBER; TO AMEND SECTION 73-15-20, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO REVISE CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE PRACTICE OF ADVANCED NURSING PRACTICE NURSES; TO VEST THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE AND OVERSEE CERTIFIED REGISTERED NURSE ANESTHETISTS, CERTIFIED NURSE MIDWIVES AND CERTIFIED NURSE PRACTITIONERS EXCLUSIVELY IN THE BOARD OF NURSING; TO PROVIDE THAT CERTIFIED REGISTERED NURSE ANESTHETISTS WHO HAVE COMPLETED NOT LESS THAN 8,000 CLINICAL PRACTICE HOURS ARE EXEMPT FROM MAINTAINING A COLLABORATIVE/CONSULTATIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH A LICENSED PHYSICIAN OR DENTIST; TO PROVIDE THAT CERTIFIED REGISTERED NURSE ANESTHETISTS MAY APPLY HOURS WORKED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT TO FULFILL THE CLINICAL PRACTICE HOUR REQUIREMENT; TO CONFORM CERTAIN PROVISIONS WITH THE MISSISSIPPI MEDICAL CANNABIS ACT; TO AMEND SECTION 73-15-29, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO INCLUDE ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSES IN THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST NURSES; TO AMEND SECTION 41-21-131, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CONFORM; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
SB 2545 revises Mississippi’s Nursing Practice Law to expand and clarify the role, regulation, and discipline of advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs). The bill updates statutory definitions to expressly include APRNs and their subcategories—certified registered nurse midwives, certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), and certified nurse practitioners—and revises the statement of purpose to recognize APRNs as part of the nursing framework. It also updates licensing, renewal, reinstatement, and practice provisions to reflect APRN practice, including controlled-substance prescribing authority and medical cannabis certification language.
A major policy change in the bill is that CRNAs with at least 8,000 clinical practice hours would no longer be required to maintain a collaborative/consultative relationship with a physician or dentist. The bill allows CRNAs to count qualifying hours earned before the act’s effective date toward that threshold. It also places exclusive regulatory authority over CRNAs, CNMs, and CNPs in the Mississippi Board of Nursing, revises the board’s membership to add a CRNA seat, and expands disciplinary provisions to expressly cover APRNs. The bill also makes conforming changes to the crisis intervention/psychiatric emergency statute and to provisions tied to the Mississippi Medical Cannabis Act.
The bill would amend multiple sections of the Mississippi Code governing nursing licensure, scope of practice, board composition, discipline, and related health-care statutes. It would broaden the statutory recognition of APRNs, revise definitions and practice rules in Section 73-15-5, alter the composition of the Mississippi Board of Nursing in Section 73-15-9, and substantially revise APRN practice requirements in Section 73-15-20. It also updates Section 73-15-29 so APRNs are expressly subject to the same disciplinary framework as other nurses, while protecting APRNs who issue medical cannabis certifications in compliance with state law. The act would take effect July 1, 2026.
Based on the bill text and available context, the overall sentiment appears supportive of expanding APRN authority and modernizing nursing regulation. The bill’s structure suggests an effort to recognize APRNs as a distinct and important part of the health-care workforce, particularly by giving the Board of Nursing exclusive oversight and by creating a pathway for experienced CRNAs to practice without physician or dentist collaboration. No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee opposition in the supplied materials.
The main point of contention is likely the scope of independent practice for CRNAs, especially the provision eliminating the collaborative/consultative relationship after 8,000 clinical practice hours. That change shifts authority away from physician or dentist oversight and may draw concern from medical or dental stakeholders who favor continued supervision. Another possible issue is the bill’s transfer of exclusive regulatory authority over APRNs to the Board of Nursing, which could be viewed as a professional autonomy issue. The addition of APRNs to disciplinary provisions and the medical cannabis conforming language are less likely to be controversial, but they still expand the regulatory responsibilities and legal exposure of APRNs.