Earlier this year, Tennessee legislators introduced three sets of bills that would require K-12 schools to verify students’ immigration status upon enrollment, charge tuition to undocumented students, and, in some cases, even deny these students enrollment.
Tennessee became one of at least five states to propose actions since President Donald Trump’s re-election win that defied federal statute requiring compliance with the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plyler v. Doe, which granted undocumented students a constitutional right to a free, public education.
On April 21, the state’s efforts hit a snag after state House majority leader William Lamberth, a Republican, paused the passage of HB 793/SB 836.
Lamberth said he wanted time to confirm with the U.S. Department of Education that such legislation would not jeopardize federal money for education in the state.
“We fully trust the Trump administration will not withhold federal dollars from our schools due to the passage of House Bill 793/Senate Bill 836,” Lamberth said in a statement. “However, out of an abundance of caution, we want to be exceptionally careful before we move forward to ensure no federal taxpayer dollars are at risk.”
The Education Department did not respond to a request for comment.
Two other legislative efforts in Tennessee targeting undocumented students failed to make headway this session. While HB 793/SB 836 can be revisited when the Tennessee legislature returns to session in January 2026, some public education and immigrant advocates call the pause a temporary yet important local and national victory against efforts to undermine students’ rights.
“This was a really hard-fought victory that folks from across the state really showed out and made sure that their voices were heard,” said Judith Clerjeune, advocacy director for the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition. “And we also understand that this fight is not over.”
Tennessee’s case serves as a cautionary tale for other states
According to the fiscal note attached to HB 793/SB 836, Tennessee receives about $1.1 billion in funds from the federal Education Department annually.
To receive that funding, the state’s department of education must sign assurances that it complies with federal civil rights laws. Laws like those proposed in HB 793/SB 836 may place Tennessee in violation, and put it at risk of losing federal dollars, said Jenny Mills McFerron, the assistant director of P-16 Policy and Research for EdTrust Tennessee, a research and advocacy group.
From a finance perspective, school districts would also face immense costs and an administrative burden to actually implement the proposed legislation by checking the immigration status of every single student enrolled in public schools, McFerron said.
The financial implications of these bills should have been considered early on, said Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF.
But really, Saenz said, there is a bigger message at hand for any state seeking to take action against the Plyler decision, in which MALDEF defended plaintiffs.
“It is not so easy, as some would suggest, to somehow tee up Plyler for being overruled, because you first have to overcome federal law that mandates compliance with Plyler,” Saenz said.
Last year, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, advised states to pass legislation challenging the Plyler decision with the long-term goal of getting the Supreme Court to revisit the landmark case.
For Saenz, such efforts, including in Tennessee, will bump up against federal statute that only the U.S. Congress can change, regardless of what the Trump administration says on the matter.
Advocacy work continues in Tennessee with a national message
At first, with the bill requiring schools to collect students’ immigration status passing Tennessee’s Senate, some advocates feared that the legislation would indeed come to pass, McFerron said. But families, students, and educators alike spent months protesting and calling representatives to voice concerns with the bills.
While the fate of Tennessee’s attacks on the Plyler decision remains in limbo, advocates on the ground plan to spend the summer continuing to spread the word about what they characterize as the far-reaching, harmful consequences such legislation would have on public education.
“I think folks from across the country should be paying attention to what just happened in Tennessee and also get ready to defend the right toward education for children across the country,” Clerjeune said.
