Tennessee Senate Bill SB2519

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 7; Title 8; Title 10; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 47; Title 49; Title 53; Title 56; Title 63; Title 68 and Title 71, relative to the protection of private data.

Summary

SB2519 is a narrow consumer privacy bill that updates one provision of Tennessee’s data-breach notification law. The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 47-18-2109 by replacing the phrase “via their websites” with “by electronic means as specified by the federal trade commission and the attorney general and reporter.” In practical terms, it shifts the statute’s notice requirements away from a website-specific method and instead ties them to whatever electronic notification methods are recognized by the FTC and the Tennessee Attorney General. The bill’s stated purpose is the protection of private data, and its effect is to modernize the way businesses and other covered entities may be required to provide notice when private information is compromised. Because the amendment is limited to a single statutory phrase, it does not broadly rewrite Tennessee privacy law, but it does affect how compliance obligations are interpreted and carried out under the state’s consumer protection framework.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee’s consumer protection and data privacy statutes, specifically Tennessee Code Annotated § 47-18-2109, by broadening the permitted method of electronic notice for certain privacy-related disclosures or breach notifications. It removes a website-only reference and instead incorporates standards set by the Federal Trade Commission and the Tennessee Attorney General and Reporter, which may give regulators more flexibility in defining acceptable electronic notice methods. The practical impact falls on businesses, data holders, and any entities subject to Tennessee’s private data notification requirements.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears neutral and technical rather than controversial. The measure reads as a housekeeping or modernization amendment intended to align state law with broader electronic notification practices. There is no evidence in the provided record of organized opposition or strong support, though the bill’s regulatory implications would likely be of interest to businesses and privacy compliance professionals.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts or voting history. The only potentially debatable issue apparent from the text is the shift from a fixed website-based notice requirement to a more flexible standard controlled by federal and state regulators. Supporters would likely view that as a modernization of privacy compliance rules, while critics might be concerned about giving agencies more discretion over notice methods or reducing clarity for regulated entities.