AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 29; Title 47 and Title 65, relative to consumer protection.
Summary
SB2262 creates a new consumer-protection remedy aimed at online search engines and their treatment of small businesses. The bill defines “blacklist” to include reducing a small business website’s visibility or accessibility in search results, removing the website or its search result, or deleting at least 25% of the business’s reviews. It also defines “online search engine” and limits the protected class to businesses with 50 or fewer full-time employees, including affiliates.
Under the bill, a small business that believes it has been blacklisted may request a written or electronic explanation from the search engine. The search engine must respond within five business days with either an explanation and justification for the action or the steps needed to appeal, be restored, or be re-indexed, along with contact information for a representative. If the search engine fails to comply, the small business may sue for actual damages, punitive damages, court costs, attorneys’ fees, and injunctive relief. The act applies only to conduct occurring on or after July 1, 2026.
Impact
The bill adds a new section to Tennessee’s consumer protection law in Title 47, Chapter 18, Part 1, creating statutory duties for online search engines when they take actions that affect small business search visibility or reviews. It gives small businesses a private right of action and authorizes monetary and equitable remedies, which could expose search engines to litigation in Tennessee for noncompliance with the response requirements. The act also amends Titles 4, 29, 47, and 65 by caption, but the operative provisions focus on consumer protection and online platform conduct.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and moved through the legislature with strong favorable votes. It was recommended for passage in the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee by a 9-0 vote, passed a Senate floor motion 32-0, and later passed on third consideration 88-5 before concurrence in a House amendment by 28-0. The vote pattern suggests general agreement with the bill’s goal of protecting small businesses, though the final floor vote indicates some limited opposition.
Contention
The main policy tension is between protecting small businesses from perceived search-engine suppression and avoiding regulation of how search engines rank, index, or moderate content. Supporters likely view the bill as a transparency and fairness measure for small businesses that depend on online visibility and reviews. Potential critics may be concerned about the breadth of the “blacklist” definition, the short five-day response deadline, the inclusion of punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, and the possibility that the law could affect search-engine editorial discretion or invite litigation over ranking decisions and review removal.