AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to school choice.
HB2286 is a short, repeal-style education bill that amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49 by deleting three existing statutory parts: Title 49, Chapter 6, Part 26; Title 49, Chapter 6, Part 35; and Title 49, Chapter 10, Part 14. The bill is captioned as relating to school choice, but the text itself does not create new programs or rules; instead, it removes those referenced provisions from the code.
The bill would take effect on July 1, 2026. Because the bill deletes existing parts of the education code, its practical impact would depend on what those repealed sections currently govern, but in general it would alter Tennessee’s school-choice-related statutory framework by removing those provisions from state law. It would affect the Department of Education, school districts, students, and families to the extent those repealed sections currently provide rights, procedures, or funding mechanisms.
HB2286 would change Tennessee education law by repealing three specific statutory parts in Title 49, thereby removing those provisions from the code as of July 1, 2026. The bill does not add new language or establish a replacement framework, so its legal effect is to eliminate the cited sections and any rights, duties, or administrative processes contained in them. The affected parties would likely include state education officials, local school systems, and families participating in any school-choice-related programs governed by the repealed sections.
Based on the available context, there is no recorded committee debate, vote history, or transcript showing explicit support or opposition. The bill’s caption suggests it is part of a school-choice policy discussion, which typically draws interest from supporters of expanded educational options and critics concerned about impacts on public schools, but the provided materials do not show any formal sentiment from legislators or committees. As a result, the overall sentiment cannot be determined from the record provided.
The main point of contention would likely be the repeal of existing school-choice provisions without a replacement structure, because that could affect how students access educational alternatives and how public education funds or administrative responsibilities are allocated. Supporters of school choice may view the deletions as a cleanup or policy shift, while opponents may see them as reducing options for families or weakening existing programs. However, no specific objections or arguments are documented in the supplied committee or vote materials.