Tennessee Senate Bill SB1290

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25
• Engrossed: 3/10/25
• Enrolled: 3/25/25
• Passed: 4/3/25
• Chaptered: 4/8/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-402, relative to testing equipment used to determine the presence of a synthetic opioid.

Summary

SB1290 amends Tennessee’s controlled substances law to remove a scheduled repeal date tied to a provision in Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-402(12)(B)(ii). The affected provision concerns testing equipment used to determine the presence of a synthetic opioid. By deleting the language that would have repealed this subdivision on July 1, 2025, the bill keeps the existing authorization or rule in place beyond that date. In practical terms, the bill preserves the legal framework for the use of testing equipment related to synthetic opioids, rather than allowing that authority to expire. The measure is narrowly focused and does not create a new program or expand the statute beyond maintaining the current provision.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-402 by striking the sunset clause for subdivision (12)(B)(ii), thereby making the provision permanent unless changed by future legislation. This affects law enforcement, public health, and any other parties relying on testing equipment to detect synthetic opioids, and it prevents the automatic expiration of that authority on July 1, 2025.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad support and little visible opposition. It passed the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously and then cleared the floor by a 30-0 vote, indicating strong bipartisan agreement or at least no recorded dissent. The available record shows no committee transcript debate, suggesting the measure was viewed as routine or noncontroversial.

Contention

No significant points of contention are reflected in the available materials. The only substantive issue is whether the synthetic-opioid testing equipment provision should continue past its scheduled repeal date, but the unanimous committee vote and unanimous floor vote suggest that lawmakers were generally aligned in favor of extending it. Because there are no transcript excerpts, no specific objections or competing policy arguments are documented.