AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 8; Title 12 and Title 50, relative to employment.
SB1922 requires Tennessee state government, its branches, and local public employers to use the federal E-Verify system to confirm the work authorization of prospective employees beginning July 1, 2026. The bill defines “employer” broadly to include the state, political subdivisions, boards, LEAs, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, counties, municipalities, metropolitan governments, and other public bodies. It also defines “employee” broadly to cover appointed, contracted, at-will, and hourly workers where an employment relationship exists.
The bill allows public employers that currently use a third-party vendor for Form I-9 verification to continue doing so until January 1, 2027, after which they must switch to E-Verify. Public employers must keep documentation of E-Verify results for each verified employee for the duration of employment. The act also prohibits local governments from adopting policies that conflict with these requirements and authorizes the attorney general to investigate credible complaints of violations by local governments or LEAs.
The bill amends Tennessee employment and local-government law by imposing a statewide E-Verify mandate on public employers and by expanding the state’s enforcement tools against local governments that do not comply. It also amends the definition of “local government action” in the state’s immigration-enforcement enforcement statute to include failures to comply with the new E-Verify requirement and other state-law duties related to immigration enforcement. If a local government or LEA is found in violation, the attorney general may seek withholding of state funds, including grants, contracts, and state-shared taxes, through existing enforcement procedures.
The available vote history suggests the bill had meaningful support in committee, passing the Senate State & Local Government Committee 7-2 with an amendment and referral to the Senate Calendar Committee. The bill’s final enactment indicates it ultimately received enough support to pass both chambers and be signed into law. Overall, the measure appears to have been treated as a public-employment and immigration-enforcement bill with strong backing from supporters of stricter verification requirements.
The main point of contention is the mandatory use of E-Verify for public employers and the enforcement mechanism tied to state funding. Opponents are likely concerned about administrative burden, implementation costs, and the threat of withholding state funds from local governments or LEAs for noncompliance. Supporters, by contrast, appear focused on uniform immigration-related employment verification and preventing local governments from adopting contrary policies. The 7-2 committee vote indicates the issue was not unanimous, reflecting disagreement over both the mandate itself and the state’s penalty authority.