AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29 and Title 39, relative to criminal conduct.
SB2468 amends Tennessee criminal law to create stronger penalties for conduct directed at houses of worship and people exercising religious freedom there. The bill adds a mandatory minimum fine for certain property offenses committed at a house of worship, requiring the court to impose a fine of at least twice the amount of property damage, loss, or cleaning/restoration costs when the offense occurs at a house of worship.
The bill also rewrites Tennessee’s offense relating to interference with religious freedom at a house of worship. It makes it a crime to use force, threats, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, or interfere with someone lawfully exercising religious freedom at a house of worship, and separately criminalizes intentional damage or destruction of house-of-worship property. These offenses are classified as Class E felonies for a first offense and Class C felonies for repeat offenses, with definitions added for “interfere,” “intimidate,” and “physical obstruction.”
The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Titles 29 and 39, increasing criminal penalties and creating new civil enforcement tools for offenses involving houses of worship. It authorizes private civil actions by affected worshippers and house-of-worship entities, with remedies including injunctions, compensatory or statutory damages of $5,000 per violation, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. It also authorizes the attorney general and reporter to seek injunctive relief and civil penalties up to $10,000 or $15,000 depending on the conduct and whether it is a repeat offense. The act takes effect July 1, 2026.
The bill appears to have broad legislative support overall, with strong committee and floor approval. The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended passage 8-0, and the final floor passage vote was 92-0, indicating clear bipartisan agreement on the bill’s core protections for houses of worship. The recorded votes suggest the measure was generally viewed favorably as a public safety and religious liberty bill.
The main points of contention likely centered on the scope and severity of the penalties and the civil enforcement provisions, especially the creation of statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and attorney general civil penalties. The failed motion on amendment #2 by Salinas, which received 21 yeas and 69 nays, indicates there was at least some disagreement over proposed changes to the bill, though the underlying bill itself ultimately passed overwhelmingly. No committee transcript is available, so the specific objections are not detailed in the record provided.