Tennessee Senate Bill SB0829

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 16, relative to criminal offenses.

Summary

SB0829 amends Tennessee’s criminal code to make it an offense for a driver, after being lawfully stopped by a law enforcement officer, to intentionally refuse the officer’s request to exit the vehicle. The bill adds this conduct as a new subdivision within Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-602, which is in Title 39, Chapter 16, the chapter covering offenses against public administration and related law-enforcement authority. In practical terms, the bill would give officers an explicit statutory basis to charge a person who willfully declines to get out of a vehicle during a lawful traffic stop when ordered to do so. The act is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2025, and would apply statewide to drivers and law enforcement encounters involving traffic stops.

Impact

The bill expands Tennessee criminal law by creating a new offense tied to compliance with lawful police commands during traffic stops. It would amend Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-602, increasing the range of conduct that can be prosecuted as interference with law enforcement authority and potentially affecting drivers, police officers, prosecutors, and defense counsel in stop-and-search situations. The measure does not create a new regulatory scheme, but it does broaden the statutory tools available to law enforcement and the courts in roadside encounters.

Sentiment

Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the available record does not show direct debate or formal support/opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a law-and-order approach aimed at clarifying police authority during lawful traffic stops. Any sentiment assessment is therefore limited to the bill’s apparent purpose rather than documented legislative discussion.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the balance between officer safety and individual rights during traffic stops. Supporters would likely view the bill as a safety measure that helps officers control potentially dangerous encounters and ensures compliance with lawful commands. Critics may argue that the offense could be applied too broadly, raise concerns about escalation during routine stops, or create ambiguity about when a refusal is intentional and when a driver is confused, fearful, or physically unable to comply. No specific opposing or supporting lawmakers are identified in the provided materials.