Tennessee House Bill HB1172

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 10; Title 37; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 55 and Title 58, relative to terrorism.

Summary

HB1172 requires the district attorneys general conference to compile an annual report on convictions obtained under Tennessee’s terrorism-related criminal provisions. The report must cover convictions from the previous year and be submitted to the General Assembly by January 15, 2026, and every January 15 thereafter. The bill does not create a new criminal offense or change the substantive elements of Tennessee’s terrorism laws. Instead, it adds a reporting requirement to Title 39, Chapter 13, Part 8, creating a recurring administrative obligation for the district attorneys general conference and a new source of information for lawmakers about how often terrorism prosecutions result in convictions.

Impact

HB1172 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 39 by adding a new section to the terrorism chapter that mandates annual reporting on convictions. Its practical effect is to increase legislative oversight and transparency regarding enforcement of terrorism-related offenses, while leaving existing criminal statutes and penalties unchanged. The bill also indirectly affects the district attorneys general conference by assigning it a continuing data-collection and reporting duty.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available record. Based on the text alone, the measure appears procedural and informational rather than controversial, suggesting a generally neutral or administrative posture. Because it does not alter criminal liability or sentencing, it would likely draw less public attention than a substantive terrorism bill.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the administrative burden placed on the district attorneys general conference, which must gather and report conviction data annually. Another possible issue is whether the reporting requirement is sufficiently useful to justify the added workload, especially if terrorism convictions are rare. No specific opponents or supporters are identified in the available materials, and no recorded committee concerns or floor debate are included.