AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, relative to criminal liability.
Summary
SB1035 is a narrow reporting bill related to criminal liability for employers who dismiss an employee because of jury service. It directs the Administrative Office of the Courts to compile and deliver a report by October 1, 2025, to the speakers of the Senate and House showing how many people were found guilty of the Class A misdemeanor described in Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-514, covering the period from January 1, 1990 through January 1, 2025.
The bill does not change the underlying criminal offense or create new penalties. Instead, it requires a retrospective count of convictions for this jury-service retaliation offense, which may be used by lawmakers to assess enforcement history, frequency of prosecutions, or whether the statute is being used effectively. Because it is a reporting requirement, its direct legal effect is limited to the courts' administrative obligations and legislative oversight.
The available voting history suggests the bill did not receive support in committee, failing in the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 9-0 vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate explaining the reasons for opposition or support. The lack of recorded discussion and the unanimous committee defeat indicate little visible momentum for the measure at that stage.
Any contention around the bill would likely center on whether the reporting mandate is necessary, whether it imposes an administrative burden on the courts, and whether the requested historical data would meaningfully inform policy. Supporters would likely view it as a transparency and oversight measure concerning protection of jurors and employees, while opponents may have seen it as unnecessary or duplicative given the narrow scope of the offense and the absence of any substantive change to criminal law.
Impact
SB1035 would amend Title 39 only indirectly by requiring the Administrative Office of the Courts to produce a historical report on convictions under Tennessee's employer-retaliation-for-jury-service misdemeanor statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-514. It does not alter the elements of the offense, the classification of the crime, or the penalties, but it does impose a one-time administrative reporting duty on the judicial branch and provides legislators with data for oversight and possible future policy review.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment reflected in the available record appears negative or at least unsupportive, as the bill failed unanimously in the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 9-0 vote. Because there are no committee transcripts, the specific arguments for or against the bill are not documented, but the vote suggests the committee did not view the reporting requirement as sufficiently necessary or compelling to advance.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the value of requiring a statewide historical conviction report for a narrow misdemeanor offense. Potential supporters would emphasize transparency, accountability, and understanding how often employers are prosecuted for retaliating against employees who serve on juries. Potential opponents would likely argue that the report is an unnecessary administrative burden, that the data may be difficult to compile over a 35-year period, or that the legislature should focus on substantive criminal-law changes rather than retrospective reporting.