TN bill may not make schools check students' legal status
Woman charged with vehicular homicide in ETSU graduate assistant's death
'No,' Johnson City School Board Chairman Jonathan Kinnick told News Channel 11 when asked Monday whether the system would begin requiring students to prove citizenship or legal residency. 'I can't imagine any system that would do that. I know for sure Johnson City will not. If the students are here, we're going to teach them.'
Until a week ago, Senate Bill 0836 and its House companion bill, House Bill 0793, had language requiring all school systems to set up such systems. Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson) has amended his version, though it still allows schools to check students' status and then deny undocumented students enrollment if they don't pay tuition.
That leaves the bill, whose House version currently maintains the requirement for all systems to check student legal status, almost certainly on track to land in court if it becomes law. The 1982 Supreme Court's Plyler v Doe' decision established, in a narrow 5-4 vote, that all children in the U.S., regardless of legal status, have a right to free public education.
'This issue will quite likely create a lawsuit, which Tennessee does not shy away from,' State Rep. David Hawk (R-Greeneville) told News Channel 11 Monday.
'Tennessee has been part of some Supreme Court decisions here recently where we have challenged what might be the status quo,' Hawk said. 'This is, I feel the time and place to go into this issue and see if the Supreme Court still feels the same way they did back in the 80s.'
Hawk recently added his name as a House co-sponsor and said he did so after seeing Watson's amendment.
'I'm not about forcing local government to do anything,' Hawk said. 'If it's deemed to be an issue within their communities, then I feel they need a right to do that. But nothing will force a school district to participate in this program.'
PREVIOUS: Educators, lawyer speak on TN proposal to require schools to check students' legal status
That will be true only if the Senate version's opt-out makes it into a final bill that then passes both chambers of the General Assembly. If that does happen, Hawk said he believes it will represent the will of many of his constituents.
'Empirical data that says illegal immigration is a top three issue with the economy and education,' Hawk said, pointing to local polling. 'Illegal immigration always sits somewhere near the top three or four in terms of issues that my constituents want me to look into.'
That doesn't mean Hawk expects any school districts in Northeast Tennessee to opt into any new law that results.
'Northeast Tennessee, our communities may or may not want this tool in the toolbox, as the old cliche goes, but some communities across Tennessee are asking for that,' he said.
Watson and Rep. William Lamberth, the House sponsor, both have claimed that English Language Learner classes have been putting a heavy strain on some school systems' budgets. But Kinnick said that hasn't been the case in one of the more demographically diverse systems in Northeast Tennessee.
'I lost count of the number of languages, but I think 60 or 70 different languages,' Kinnick said. 'But they're here. We're going to teach them.'
He said the legal advice his board has received is to follow the current law of the land.
'We want to teach them,' Kinnick said. 'Our take from our attorney is that we're going to honor the Supreme Court decision with Plyler versus Doe and it doesn't matter what the immigration status is.'
Local immigration attorney McKenna Cox — who said she believes the amendment was added to 'potentially pacify people who were very up in arms about it from all political sides' — isn't surprised at Kinnick's approach.
'In my experience, most schools aren't particularly excited about having additional requirements added to them and/or about not being able to educate as many children as they can,' Cox said.
And while Cox vehemently opposes the bill in any form, she agrees with Hawk that it's likely to have much broader implications if it becomes law.
'I think that's really what this will become, is kind of a microcosm of a nationwide conflict funded by many different groups on both sides, to try to set this aside or make it the law of the land.'
That would require at least one school system to opt in, which wouldn't surprise her.
'It gets to the very heart of established precedent and law in this country,' she said. 'It gets to the very heart of the political moment that we are in, which is, we're seeing all kinds of anti-immigrant legislation across the country.
''Can we discriminate' becomes a major question right now. The Supreme Court in the past has said, 'no, you can't,' and we're going to have to see if that changes.'
Widow seeks answers after getting wrong ashes from funeral home
Hawk said he believes the financial pressures on some school systems justify the effort.
'If a local government is seeing a financial burden with illegal immigration in their educational system, then this is a good way for them to take action,' Hawk said. 'You may see five to 10 that may participate in that because … they are such fast-growing school districts that it may be a financial burden to them, more so than other school districts.'
The bill is on Tuesday's Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee calendar – where it's already been deferred twice.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
14 minutes ago
- USA Today
California redistricting vote begins with overwhelming support, Newsom pollster says
Newsom has called for a Nov. 4 special election on the new maps. The California state legislature, where Democrats have a supermajority, would first need to vote to put the measure before the voters. WASHINGTON ― California Gov. Gavin Newsom's redistricting proposal aimed at creating five new Democratic congressional seats begins with overwhelming support ahead of a planned November referendum when voters would decide its fate, according to a survey conducted by his longtime pollster. The proposal is backed by 57% of California voters and opposed by 35%, the poll taken by Democratic pollster David Binder found, according to a report by Axios. Another 8% of voters in the heavily Democratic state said they were undecided. Newsom has portrayed his mid-term redistricting push as necessary to offset Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's pursuit to create five new Republican congressional districts in Texas. President Donald Trump has publicly lobbied for the gerrymandering in Texas to boost Republican chances in the 2026 midterm elections. Newsom last week called for a Nov. 4 special election on the new maps. The California state legislature, where Democrats have a supermajority, would first need to vote to put the measure before the voters. The poll found 84% of California's Democratic voters support the redistricting plan while 79% of the state's Republicans oppose it. The 57% in overall support for the redistricting plan is a jump from the 51% who said they backed redrawing California's congressional maps in a July poll. California currently has 43 congressional seats held by Democrats and nine by Republicans. The creation of five new Democratic-friendly districts could sway California's delegation to a 48-5 advantage for Democrats. Yet the move comes with risk for Democrats because it might create several competitive seats that Republicans could target. "I know they say, 'Don't mess with Texas,'" Newsom, widely considered a potential presidential candidate in 2028, quipped at a Democratic rally kicking off the redistricting campaign last week. "Well, don't mess with the great Golden State." California has an independent redistricting commission that is designed to limit partisan influence on the map-drawing process, but Newsom said the measure would allow a new process to draw maps that would go into effect for House elections in 2026, 2028, and 2030, before ceding power back to the commission to draw maps ahead of 2032. Redistricting in all states is required by federal law every 10 years following the release of new U.S. Census Bureau figures; however, Trump pushed Texas Republicans to jumpstart the process in the middle of the decade, setting off a cross-country redistricting fight. Redistricting efforts are also ongoing in Florida and Ohio that could benefit Republicans, while Republican-controlled Indiana and Missouri are also discussing redrawing their maps. Control of the U.S. House of Representatives at stake, with Republicans currently holding a 219-212 majority. Contributing: Erin Mansfield of USA TODAY Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.


The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
Paxton's lead over Cornyn nearly cut in half: poll
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's (R) lead over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) in the state's Senate primary is narrowing, according to a new survey from Texas Southern University's Barbara Jordan Public Policy Research and Survey Center survey. The poll showed Paxton holding a five-point lead among likely primary voters, 44 percent to 39 percent, in a two-way race with Cornyn. Another 17 percent said they were undecided. The last Texas Southern University poll released in May showed Paxton with a nine-point lead over Cornyn. The five-point gap between Paxton and Cornyn remains the same in a hypothetical three-way race with Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas), who has been considering a primary run. Paxton leads with 35 percent while Cornyn trails at 30 percent. Hunt comes in with 22 percent support. Another 13 percent said they were unsure. The poll released on Wednesday comes after a separate Emerson College survey released last week showed the incumbent senator and attorney general locked in a dead heat. That poll showed Cornyn leading Paxton 30 percent to 29 percent, with five percent saying they prefer another candidate and 37 percent saying they were undecided. Most polls released before last week's Emerson College poll showed Paxton with a double-digit lead over Cornyn, leading to questions about the incumbent senator's electability in a primary. Cornyn's allies have pulled out all of the stops in an effort to boost him. According to The Texas Tribune, the Senate GOP leadership-affiliated One Nation has spent more than $4 million in advertising, while Texans for a Conservative Majority, another pro-Cornyn group, has spent $3.2 million. The pro-Cornyn Conservative Majority Project has spent roughly $500,000. The latest poll from Texas Southern University's Barbara Jordan Public Policy Research and Survey Center was conducted from Aug. 6 to Aug. 12, 2025 among 1,500 likely Texas Republican primary voters. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.53 percentage points.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hoosier elections must remain free and fair
Will Indiana follow Texas' lead in redistricting mid-decade? (Getty Images) Vice President J.D. Vance recently visited Indiana to meet with Gov. Mike Braun and Republican leaders. They discussed a plan to redraw the state's congressional districts this year, mid-decade, in order to gain one or both of the seats currently held by Indiana Democrats and rig the 2026 mid-terms so Republicans can preserve their very slim House majority. We are scholars and teachers of U.S. law and politics. And we are deeply troubled by the Trump administration's attempt to rewrite the electoral rules mid-stream to maximize its power, and by Indiana Republicans' failure to immediately reject such a transparently partisan move, which would corrupt the fairness of our elections. Whatever our party affiliation, all Hoosiers should care about fairness. We would never support changing the rules in the middle of a basketball game so that our team would gain unfair advantage. We want winners to win fair and square. In sports, and in politics. Such corruption is possible because the process whereby Congressional districts are created is localized and susceptible to being rigged by those bent on gaining an unfair partisan advantage. According to the U.S. Constitution, Congress allocates seats in the House of Representatives to states based on population. A census must be taken within every ten years to determine how population shifts may change the number of Congressional districts allocated to each state — a process called reapportionment. The actual shape of Congressional districts in each state is determined by state legislation. Indiana's House GOP congressional contingent lines up behind redistricting effort In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that Congressional districts must be of roughly equal population and honor the principle of 'one person, one vote.' Since then, Congressional redistricting has almost always been done on the ten-year cycle, except when federal courts have required certain states to redraw their maps to bring them into compliance with federal election law. But now Texas Republicans are trying to redraw their Congressional map mid-decade. The reason why: because President Trump has very publicly called upon them to do this, telling CNBC's Squawk Box: 'We have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas . . . and we are entitled to five more seats.' It should be obvious that Trump's vote total in the 2024 presidential election confers no GOP entitlement to extra House seats, which are not allocated based on presidential popularity (indeed, while Trump only received 56% of the 2024 Presidential vote, the Texas GOP controls 66% of the state's House seats). If the party wants five more seats in Texas or two more in Indiana, then the correct way to obtain them is to run strong candidates in districts currently held by Democrats, and win the elections in those districts, fair and square. The administration's push for Texas, Indiana, and other 'red' states to redistrict now has one very clear purpose: to change the electoral map, midstream, so that Trump and his party can retain control of the entire federal government by giving more power to voters they like while taking electoral power away from voters they don't like. And that is simply not fair. Hoosier citizens, and not statehouse Republicans, should choose who they want to represent them in their congressional districts in 2026 and 2028 and 2030. And they can freely choose only if the elections are fair. Any party that tries to try to change district boundaries in advance of an election just so they have a better chance of winning the election is doing something that has a simple name: cheating. Basketball coach John Wooden, a legendary Hoosier, famously taught his players to 'never lie, never cheat, never steal.' Indiana Republicans should heed coach Wooden's famous words, politely refuse to do the bidding of the Trump administration, and stand tall, with their Democratic counterparts, and all patriotic Hoosiers, in defense of the fairness of our elections.