Tennessee House Bill HB0234

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/21/25
• Refer: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/10/25
• Engrossed: 2/20/25
• Enrolled: 2/25/25
• Passed: 3/14/25
• Chaptered: 3/24/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 63, Chapter 10, relative to the board of pharmacy.

Summary

HB0234 makes a narrow technical change to Tennessee law governing the Board of Pharmacy. The bill removes the Board of Pharmacy from one of the statutory provisions listing state entities subject to periodic review and reauthorizes it in a different provision that continues the board’s existence under Tennessee Code Annotated Title 63, Chapter 10. In practical terms, the measure updates the board’s placement in the state’s regulatory framework rather than changing pharmacy licensing, enforcement, or professional standards. The bill appears to function as a housekeeping or sunset-related measure for the Board of Pharmacy, ensuring the board remains properly codified and authorized under state law. It does not create new duties, fees, or substantive regulatory requirements for pharmacists, pharmacies, or the public. Instead, it amends cross-references in the Tennessee Code to reflect the board’s continued status.

Impact

HB0234 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 4 and Title 63 by deleting the Board of Pharmacy from one statutory subdivision and adding it to another that preserves the board’s authorization. The effect is to maintain the legal existence and statutory recognition of the Board of Pharmacy, which oversees pharmacy licensure and regulation in Tennessee, without altering the board’s core powers or the rules governing pharmacy practice.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been broadly noncontroversial and received unanimous support at each recorded stage. It passed the House Government Operations Committee 10-0, passed the House on the consent calendar 89-0, and later received a 33-0 motion to adopt in the Senate. The lack of dissent suggests general agreement that the measure was routine and administrative in nature.

Contention

There is no recorded substantive opposition or committee debate in the provided materials. Because the bill is a technical codification and reauthorization measure, any potential concern would likely have centered on the broader state review/reauthorization process for boards rather than on pharmacy policy itself, but no such objection is reflected in the votes or transcripts provided.