Tennessee Senate Bill SB0929

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 1; Title 2; Title 3; Title 4; Title 7; Title 8; Title 9; Title 10; Title 11; Title 12; Title 13; Title 16; Title 17; Title 29; Title 33; Title 36; Title 37; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 41; Title 43; Title 47; Title 49; Title 50; Title 52; Title 53; Title 54; Title 55; Title 56; Title 57; Title 58; Title 62; Title 63; Title 64; Title 65; Title 67; Title 68; Title 69; Title 70; Title 71 and Chapter 895 of the Public Acts of 2024, relative to legislative committees of the House of Representatives.

Summary

SB0929 makes a narrow, technical change to Tennessee law governing the Code Commission. In Tennessee Code Annotated section 1-1-108(a), it replaces a reference to the “civil justice committee of the house of representatives” with a reference to the House committee that has jurisdiction over matters pertaining to the Code Commission. The bill does not create a new program, impose a new regulatory scheme, or change substantive rights; it simply updates statutory language to reflect the current House committee structure and jurisdiction. The bill’s broader effect is to keep Tennessee’s statutory references aligned with legislative organization. Because the amendment appears in a provision tied to the Code Commission, the change likely affects how the House’s designated committee is identified for purposes of oversight or related procedural duties. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law, indicating it is intended to correct or modernize the code without delay.

Impact

SB0929 amends Tennessee Code Annotated section 1-1-108(a) and, by reference, updates how state law identifies the relevant House committee for Code Commission matters. The practical impact is limited to legislative administration and statutory housekeeping: it changes an outdated committee reference to the current committee with jurisdiction over the Code Commission, while leaving substantive law unchanged. The bill may also require the Code Commission and legislative staff to use the updated committee designation in future code-related references and procedures.

Sentiment

The available context suggests little to no controversy around SB0929. Because the bill is a technical, non-substantive update to committee nomenclature, it would generally be expected to draw neutral or routine support rather than debate over policy outcomes. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, and nothing in the bill text indicates partisan or policy disagreement.

Contention

There are no recorded committee discussions or votes in the provided materials, and the bill’s text does not reveal any major points of contention. If any issue were to arise, it would likely be limited to whether the statutory reference should point to the House committee currently assigned Code Commission jurisdiction rather than the former civil justice committee. That is an administrative drafting question, not a substantive policy dispute, and no opposing viewpoints are documented here.