Tennessee House Bill HB2296

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/5/26
• Refer: 3/25/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39; Title 40 and Title 55, relative to global positioning monitoring.

Summary

HB2296 expands Tennessee’s use of global positioning monitoring as a condition of bail for certain defendants. The bill requires a court or magistrate to order a defendant arrested for specified offenses to wear a GPS monitoring device unless the court finds the person no longer poses a threat to the alleged victim or public safety. The covered offenses include crimes involving a firearm or dangerous weapon, offenses where someone was killed or seriously injured, offenses involving force against another person, domestic assault, burglary of certain vehicles, reckless driving, drag racing, and second or subsequent offenses under certain violent- and property-crime chapters. The bill also requires court clerks to report monthly data on defendants subject to GPS monitoring orders to the Administrative Office of the Courts, which must then compile an annual statewide and county-by-county report for legislative committees. The act would take effect July 1, 2026, and it amends Tennessee Code Annotated provisions governing bail and pretrial release conditions, particularly expanding mandatory monitoring requirements beyond the existing domestic-violence-related aggravated assault provision.

Impact

HB2296 would amend Tennessee’s bail statutes in Title 40 and related criminal and traffic offense provisions in Titles 39 and 55 by broadening the circumstances under which GPS monitoring must be imposed as a condition of bail. It would add a new section requiring monitoring for a wider set of violent, domestic, vehicle-related, and repeat-offense arrests, and it would revise existing bail language in § 40-11-152(b)(2) to incorporate those new categories. The bill also creates a new reporting obligation for courts and the Administrative Office of the Courts, increasing administrative tracking of pretrial monitoring orders and producing annual legislative reports.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably at the subcommittee level, with a unanimous 8-0 recommendation for passage and referral to the Judiciary Committee. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate broader support or opposition. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a public-safety measure with little visible resistance in the available record.

Contention

The main policy tension in HB2296 is between public safety and judicial discretion. Supporters would likely favor mandatory GPS monitoring for defendants accused of serious, violent, domestic, or repeat offenses as a way to protect alleged victims and the public before trial. Potential concerns are that the bill expands a mandatory bail condition across multiple offense categories, which could be viewed as limiting individualized judicial decision-making and increasing pretrial surveillance burdens. The bill preserves some discretion by allowing the court or magistrate to decline monitoring if it finds the defendant no longer poses a threat, but the default rule is mandatory monitoring for the listed offenses.