Tennessee House Bill HB0350

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 3; Title 4; Title 8; Title 9; Title 27; Title 29; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40 and Title 41, relative to government oversight.

Summary

HB0350 makes a very narrow amendment to Tennessee law governing access to certain records or materials held by the state. Specifically, it changes Tennessee Code Annotated § 41-1-114 by adding the “legislative librarian” to the list of entities referenced alongside “the general assembly.” The bill does not create a new program, penalty, or regulatory scheme; it appears to be a technical clarification within the state’s government records and oversight framework. Because the bill is limited to a single statutory edit, its practical effect is likely modest but targeted. It would expand or clarify the role of the legislative librarian in the relevant provision of Title 41, which concerns criminal procedure and related state records matters. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law, indicating the legislature viewed it as a noncontroversial housekeeping measure.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 41-1-114 to expressly include the legislative librarian after “the general assembly,” thereby updating the statute’s language and potentially clarifying who is covered by or may act under that provision. Its impact is confined to state law administration and records oversight, with no direct effect on private parties, taxation, licensing, or criminal penalties beyond the statutory reference change.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition. Based on the bill’s narrow, technical nature and immediate effective date, the overall sentiment appears to be neutral to favorable, with the measure likely treated as a routine clarification rather than a substantive policy change.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. If any concern existed, it would most likely relate to whether the legislative librarian should be explicitly included in the statute’s scope, but the bill text suggests this was a straightforward technical correction rather than a disputed policy issue.