Tennessee Senate Bill SB2389

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 8; Title 10; Title 66 and Title 67, relative to registers of deeds.

Summary

SB2389 creates a new requirement for county registers of deeds when a person presents a document to transfer real property for recording in the county real property records. In covered counties, the register must require the person to show a government-issued identification card before the document is recorded, and the register must copy or record information from that ID. The bill defines the type of identification that qualifies and makes the copied ID information confidential. The bill also provides that a document is not invalid solely because the county clerk or register failed to copy or record the identification information. The new section is temporary and repeals two years after the effective date. By its terms, the bill applies only to counties with a population of at least 900,000 under the 2020 census or later, which limits its practical effect to Tennessee’s largest county or counties meeting that threshold.

Impact

The bill would add a new, targeted recording procedure to Tennessee’s property-recording laws in Title 66, requiring identity verification for in-person real property transfer filings in large counties. It would impose a new administrative duty on registers of deeds to inspect and document government-issued identification, while also creating a confidentiality rule for the recorded ID information and prohibiting a fee for the copying or recording process. The measure does not invalidate recorded documents for noncompliance with the ID-copying requirement, and its sunset clause means the change would be temporary unless reenacted.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes are available in the provided materials, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to reflect a policy preference for stronger anti-fraud safeguards in real property transfers, especially in high-population counties where recording activity is likely heavier. The absence of recorded legislative discussion makes the overall sentiment difficult to gauge beyond the bill’s apparent administrative and consumer-protection orientation.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the added administrative burden on registers of deeds and the privacy implications of collecting and storing identification information, even though the bill makes that information confidential. Another possible issue is the bill’s narrow geographic application to counties with populations of at least 900,000, which may raise questions about unequal treatment across counties or whether the measure should apply statewide. Supporters would likely emphasize fraud prevention and title integrity, while critics may focus on implementation costs, privacy, and the limited scope of the requirement.