In the latest overt challenge to Supreme Court precedent, Tennessee Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation that would allow school districts to refuse enrollment to undocumented students.
The bill contradicts the 1982 Plyler v. Doe decision by the United States Supreme Court, which established that all children, regardless of immigration status, are entitled to public education.
Tennessee House Majority Leader Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) and state Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson) introduced a bill on Tuesday that would directly challenge more than 40 years of precedent by allowing local education authorities, such as school boards, to bar students without legal citizenship from attending public schools.
In an accompanying statement, Watson and Lamberth claim that the bill “seeks to challenge” the court decision, citing the cost of public education.
“The influx of illegal immigrants into our country has put a significant strain on American tax dollars and resources. “Our schools are the first to feel the impact,” Lamberth stated.
“When the federal government fails to secure our borders, Tennessee communities should not bear the brunt of the consequences. Our first obligation is to ensure that legal residents receive a high-quality education.
Watson’s comments on Tuesday focused on the impact on public school funding.
“Our education system has limited resources, which should be prioritized for students who are legally present in the country,” Watson told the audience. “Illegal immigration can put a strain on LEAs’ budgets. This bill enables local governments to better manage their resources and builds on the legislative action taken during the special session to combat illegal immigration at the local level.”
The bill text is brief, but it states that school districts and charter schools may refuse enrollment to students who are “unlawfully present in the United States.”
This would most likely include non-citizen children and children whose families’ Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, has been revoked. Trump recently moved to terminate TPS for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan migrants, and he may soon end protections for migrants from other countries.
The bill comes after a four-day special legislative session that focused on increasing immigration enforcement and a $447 million school voucher program. According to the legislature’s estimates, the voucher plan will directly remove $47 million from public school education, with the amount potentially increasing.
Their arguments are similar to those of Rep. Gino Bulso (R-Brentwood), who introduced the “Tennessee Reduction of Unlawful Migrant Placement” or “TRUMP” Act in January, which would, among other things, require parents of children without full citizenship to pay tuition to attend public schools. Texas passed a similar law in 1975, which resulted in the Plyler v. Doe decision.
Bulso stated at the time that the bill was intended to conserve public resources for citizens, but he also acknowledged that such legislation can serve as a “disincentive for those who are considering coming into the country illegally from coming to Tennessee.”
The Heritage Foundation, a think tank with ties to President Donald Trump, has proposed charging undocumented students or children of undocumented parents tuition to attend public schools in recent years. A 2024 Heritage brief suggested that states implement such policies in order to elicit lawsuits that could force the Supreme Court to reconsider Plyler.
According to Casey Bryant, founder and executive director of Advocates for Immigration Rights of Memphis, the Tennessee bill is far from being enacted, despite the momentum from Tennessee lawmakers who support penalizing and deporting those without citizenship.
“I think there’s always been people who were trying to do this, and they’ve just been chomping at the bit to make it happen,” Bryant said of Tennessee lawmakers on Tuesday. “Even if it gets through the Tennessee General Assembly — which will be shameful for the state — it won’t go into effect for a long time, because this gonna be wrapped up in years of litigation.”
As an immigration attorney, Bryant claims that the litany of recent proposed policy changes at the state and federal levels has already had a chilling effect on the immigrant community, regardless of citizenship status, even before the aggressive policies are implemented.
“I mean, people are not going out at all,” Bryant said of Memphis’ immigrant communities, noting that a number of people have missed work due to fears of ICE raids.
“There is a lot of fear, and it really is sending a message across the land that this isn’t a safe place for people and they’re going to be penalized for who they are or what they look like, even people who have lawful status in the United States,” according to him.
The proposal is consistent with recent responses by Tennessee Republican lawmakers and Gov. Bill Lee to President Donald Trump’s edict directing state and local governments to tighten immigration enforcement. It also demonstrates Tennessee leadership’s growing willingness to push legally contentious policies with the goal of resolving them in court.
Sen. Raumesh Akbari (D-Memphis) blasted the bill as a diversion from policies that could address public school funding and rife with legal ramifications.
“House Bill 793 is not only cruel, but also unconstitutional. This is not a policy proposal; it is a lawsuit intended to deny children their right to an education while wasting taxpayer dollars. “Every child, regardless of their background, deserves a public education,” Akbari stated.
During a victory lap press conference at the end of the special session, Lamberth stated that Republican leadership would continue to be “bold” enough to introduce bills that could face constitutional challenges, citing an ongoing Supreme Court challenge to the state’s gender-affirming care ban for minors.
Sen. London Lamar (D-Memphis) said the policy contributes to a recent pattern of biased education decisions in Tennessee, citing local book bans targeting works written by people of color, the voucher bill, which opponents believe will worsen educational disparities, and the ongoing financial crisis at Tennessee State University, the state’s oldest HBCU.
“This bill doesn’t even try to hide its prejudiced intent,” Lamar told the audience. “Like school vouchers, which were created in response to desegregation, this legislation selects which students deserve opportunities. We’ve seen this before, and we’re not going to let them drag us back.”
