Tennessee Senate Bill SB0121

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to electronic devices on school property.

Summary

SB 121 amends Tennessee law governing electronic devices on school property to explicitly apply to both local education agencies (LEAs) and public charter schools. The bill updates existing statutory language throughout Tennessee Code Annotated § 49-1-221 so that charter schools are treated the same as school districts for purposes of policies on student and staff electronic devices. A key substantive change prohibits LEAs and public charter schools from tracking or monitoring a person’s internet use through a personal electronic device on school property, with a narrow exception when a student uses a personal device during a test. The bill also makes conforming changes to ensure that directors of public charter schools are included alongside directors of schools in the statute’s enforcement and policy provisions. The act is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2025.

Impact

The bill expands and clarifies existing school-device policy law by bringing public charter schools within the same statutory framework that already applies to LEAs. It limits school authority over personal electronic devices by barring internet-use tracking or monitoring on school property, except in testing situations, and it updates related enforcement language to cover charter school administrators and policies. The practical effect is to impose a privacy-related restriction on school oversight of personal devices while standardizing compliance obligations across traditional public schools and charter schools.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be a straightforward policy and conforming-language update rather than a highly contested proposal. The bill’s structure suggests an administrative and privacy-focused approach, with no evidence in the record provided of formal opposition, amendments, or divided votes. Overall sentiment is best characterized as neutral to supportive, with the bill framed as a clarification of school policy authority.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the balance between student privacy and school oversight. Supporters would likely view the bill as protecting students and other individuals on school property from monitoring of personal device internet activity, while opponents could argue that schools need broader monitoring authority for safety, discipline, or academic integrity. A secondary issue is the inclusion of public charter schools in the statute, which may raise questions about whether charter schools should be subject to the same device-policy restrictions and administrative requirements as LEAs.