Tennessee Senate Bill SB1186

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 37; Title 39; Title 40, Chapter 11 and Title 49, relative to juveniles.

Summary

SB1186 makes two main changes to Tennessee law affecting juveniles and school discipline. First, it authorizes a juvenile court, when it appoints a person or entity to take charge of a child, to order the child to wear a GPS monitoring device and to require the monitoring provider to notify the appointed custodian if the child violates court instructions after release. This adds a new supervision tool in juvenile court proceedings and ties the monitoring definition to existing state law governing GPS monitoring. Second, the bill creates a new school-discipline requirement for students expelled for a zero-tolerance offense involving a threat of mass violence on school property or at a school-related activity. Before such a student may return to school, the director of schools or charter school head must require counseling and an outpatient mental health evaluation to assess whether the student poses a danger to self or others. The evaluator must report findings to school leadership, the report is confidential, and the cost is assigned to the student’s parents or to the student if the student is an adult. The bill also makes conforming changes to related education statutes and takes effect July 1, 2025, applying only to conduct occurring on or after that date.

Impact

The bill would amend Tennessee Code Annotated Titles 37, 39, 40, and 49 by expanding juvenile court authority to impose GPS monitoring on certain children and by adding a mandatory counseling and mental health evaluation condition for return to school after expulsion for threats of mass violence. It would affect juvenile courts, schools, public charter schools, mental health providers designated by the commissioner, parents, and students subject to expulsion, while also updating cross-references in existing school discipline statutes.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or vote records were provided, so there is no direct record of debate or recorded support/opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a public-safety and school-security approach, with an emphasis on monitoring and mental health assessment for juveniles involved in serious threats.

Contention

The most likely points of contention are the bill’s mandatory nature and who bears the cost. Requiring counseling and a mental health evaluation before readmission could raise concerns about due process, privacy, access to services, and whether schools should condition return on a clinical assessment. The provision placing the cost on parents or the student may also be disputed, particularly for families with limited means. The GPS monitoring authority for juveniles may similarly prompt concerns about surveillance, discretion, and the scope of court-ordered restrictions.