TN immigration enforcement division to be largely exempt from state public records laws
Records made by a recently-created state immigration enforcement office, the result of a new law passed in late January, could largely remain secret from the public — drawing concern from First Amendment experts and immigration advocates.
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed the immigration bill on Feb. 12, establishing a new state enforcement office which will act as a liaison between local and federal officers on immigration issues. The law largely exempts from the new office from public records laws.
The law also criminalizes local officials who vote for sanctuary policies.
More: Tennessee GOP passes immigration law to criminalize elected officials' votes
An amendment filed shortly before the law passed states that any information collected by the enforcement office or chief immigration enforcement officer, including but not limited to 'sensitive or confidential law enforcement information' collected at the federal, state or local level, can remain confidential.
This makes the newly created division almost entirely exempt from the Tennessee Public Records Act, meaning that while the office could release whatever information it wants, members of the media and public can de denied nearly any information requested from it.
Lee spokesperson Elizabeth Johnson said the new law 'creates a robust framework to strengthen immigration enforcement across Tennessee,' adding that the public records exemption is 'consistent with current department practice.'
'Gov. Lee remains committed to transparency, while recognizing the need to ensure that law enforcement operations are not compromised,' Johnson said. 'The Department will process public records requests consistent with Tennessee state law.'
Deborah Fisher, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, cautioned that the law is written to exempt far more than just law enforcement operations.
'The exemption is much broader than that and basically says any records it collects or receives…could be confidential,' Fisher said. 'That is a big swath of records, and it's too broad. And I fear that what we will know about this immigration division will be largely what the division wants to tell the public, rather than what's actually going on.'
The push to pass the immigration measure was seen by many proponents as a way to help further President Donald Trump's immigration policies.
The legislation will fund a $5 million office within the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security, allowing Lee to tap an enforcement director and incentivize local law enforcement entities to enter into contracts with federal immigration authorities.
Local law enforcement can already apply for the federal contract program, called 287(g) agreements. Currently, only Knox and Greene counties have such agreements. Davidson County dropped its coordination agreement in 2012 after a string of controversies that gained national attention.
Sen. Bo Watson, R-Hixson, who sponsored the amendment exempting the division from current public records laws, told the Senate Finance Ways and Means Committee in January that the amendment made the new division's records-keeping more consistent with current exemptions.
'It also extends — and this is an important component for safety — the confidentiality protections for law enforcement records already held by Department of Safety to also apply to documents maintained by the newly established immigration enforcement division,' he said.
But current exemptions for the Department of Safety and Homeland Security only pertain to criminal investigations, handgun permits, motor vehicle records and other similar administrative forms.
Issues of immigration enforcement are often considered civil matters, not criminal. And the language of the bill does not limit the records kept confidential to law enforcement records, but rather to any record deemed 'sensitive.'
Jason Pack, communications director at the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security, defended the need to classify documents as sensitive, saying the provision is "designed to protect information that could compromise enforcement efforts, endanger individuals, or reveal operational strategies."
"The 'sensitive' classification isn't arbitrary — decisions will be based on objective factors, similar to how the Department of Safety and Homeland Security already handles security-related records," he said. "The goal isn't to withhold information without cause, but to ensure that law enforcement operations are not compromised."
Fisher emphasized the public has a right to information collected by such an agency.
'I think the public has an interest in the progress toward the immigration enforcement goals, and the public has committed a huge chunk of change to it,' Fisher said. 'In my mind, they need to know if it gets any results, and this seems to shield any access to records.'
Fisher compared the action to the law passed last year that similarly allowed records from the Tennessee Department of Tourism Development to be exempt from public records if the tourism commissioner and attorney general deem them 'sensitive.'
'Sometimes these things get written really broadly, because they wanted to give them the most latitude possible to keep information confidential,' she said. 'But the public records law exists to assure the right of the public to records.'
Gunita Singh, a staff attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said the usage of the word 'sensitive' to block an unknown number of records is concerning.
'The language of the recently passed bill is troubling,' she said. 'What is a 'sensitive' document? Who gets to decide? The language as written imparts too much discretion onto the record custodian when exemptions to public records should be as narrow as possible to maximize public access.'
Singh said the state's public records law contains an 'explicit presumption in favor of disclosure,' so as to 'give the fullest possible access to public records.'
'This bill flies in the face of that longstanding principle,' she said.
Emily Stotts, legal director at Tennessee Justice for Our Neighbors, a nonpartisan pro-bono legal team specializing in immigration services, said the new law feels like a 'witch hunt.'
'I think what some of this legislation is doing, both federally and locally, is just causing a lot more fear amongst the (immigrant) communities,' she said, adding the portion of the law that criminalizes local votes for sanctuary policies is especially concerning.
The organization largely serves impoverished clients, particularly in humanitarian-based immigration cases — like asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, DACA applicants, and more — and family-based immigration cases, which includes reuniting families that are often of mixed-status citizenship.
Over the past year, the group served over 800 clients. Currently, Stotts said the organization has temporarily paused taking on new clients due to the current, heavy case load that has resulted from the rapidly changing federal and state immigration responses.
The new immigration enforcement division did not come as a surprise to the organization, Stotts said, though the law is causing panic in vulnerable communities looking for legal help.
'Tennessee has been not an immigrant-friendly state for as long as I've been practicing law,' she said. 'And so that's not really changing ... but it's sort of causing this hysteria.'
Amid the increasing pace of newly passed immigration laws, both at the federal and state level, Stotts said a lack of public transparency is of paramount concern.
'I worry about that with any law — not just immigration law — but anytime something lacks transparency,' she said. 'It should be a red flag.'
Melissa Brown contributed to this report.
The USA TODAY Network - Tennessee's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Have a story to tell? Reach Angele Latham by email at alatham@gannett.com, by phone at 931-623-9485, or follow her on Twitter at @angele_latham
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: TN immigration division to be largely exempt from public records laws
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Explainer-Does U.S. law allow Trump to send troops to quell protests?
By Dietrich Knauth President Donald Trump has deployed National Guard troops to California after two days of protests by hundreds of demonstrators against immigration raids, saying that the protests interfered with federal law enforcement and framing them as a possible 'form of rebellion' against the authority of the U.S. government. California Governor Gavin Newsom on Sunday said he had formally requested that the Trump Administration rescind "its unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles County" and return them to his command. WHAT LAWS DID TRUMP CITE TO JUSTIFY THE MOVE? Trump cited Title 10 of the U.S. Code, a federal law that outlines the role of the U.S. Armed Forces, in his June 7 order to call members of the California National Guard into federal service. A provision of Title 10 - Section 12406 - allows the president to deploy National Guard units into federal service if the U.S. is invaded, there is a 'rebellion or danger of rebellion' or the president is 'unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' WHAT ARE NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ALLOWED TO DO UNDER THE LAW CITED IN TRUMP'S ORDER? An 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement. Section 12406 does not override that prohibition, but it allows the troops to protect federal agents who are carrying out law enforcement activity and to protect federal property. For example, National Guard troops cannot arrest protesters, but they could protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who are carrying out arrests. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH? The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to assembly, freedom of speech and the press. Experts have said that Trump's decision to have U.S. troops respond to protests is an ominous sign for how far the president is willing to go to repress political speech and activity that he disagrees with or that criticizes his administration's policies. IS TRUMP'S MOVE SUSCEPTIBLE TO LEGAL CHALLENGES? Four legal experts from both left- and right-leaning advocacy organizations have cast doubt on Trump's use of Title 10 in response to immigration protests calling it inflammatory and reckless, especially without the support of California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who has said Trump's actions would only escalate tensions. The protests in California do not rise to the level of 'rebellion' and do not prevent the federal government from executing the laws of the United States, experts said. Title 10 also says "orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States," but legal experts said that language might not be an obstacle. Legislative history suggests that those words were likely meant to reflect the norms of how National Guard troops are typically deployed, rather than giving a governor the option to not comply with a president's decision to deploy troops. COULD CALIFORNIA SUE TO CHALLENGE TRUMP'S MOVE? California could file a lawsuit, arguing that deployment of National Guard troops was not justified by Title 10 because there was no 'rebellion' or threat to law enforcement. A lawsuit might take months to resolve, and the outcome would be uncertain. Because the protests may be over before a lawsuit is resolved, the decision to sue might be more of a political question than a legal one, experts said. WHAT OTHER LAWS COULD TRUMP INVOKE TO DIRECT THE NATIONAL GUARD OR OTHER U.S MILITARY TROOPS? Trump could take a more far-reaching step by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1792, which would allow troops to directly participate in civilian law enforcement, for which there is little recent precedent. Casting protests as an 'insurrection' that requires the deployment of troops against U.S. citizens would be riskier legal territory, one legal expert said, in part because mostly peaceful protests and minor incidents aren't the sort of thing that the Insurrection Act were designed to address. The Insurrection Act has been used by past presidents to deploy troops within the U.S. in response to crises like the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan in the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War. The law was last invoked by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, when the governor of California requested military aid to suppress unrest in Los Angeles following the Rodney King trial. But, the last time a president deployed the National Guard in a state without a request from that state's governor was 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson sent troops to protect civil rights demonstrators in Montgomery, Alabama.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
National Guard deployed to L.A. and Trump warns Musk of 'consequences': Weekend Rundown
President Donald Trump moved to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass after immigration raids in the city led to protests and disorder. Approximately 300 National Guard members descended on Los Angeles on Sunday morning after the president ordered the deployment of 2,000 troops, a move sharply criticized as inflammatory and unnecessary by Newsom and a 'chaotic escalation' by Bass, who warned that an 'extreme presence of troops or law enforcement officers' could stoke 'massive civil unrest.' Tom Homan, Trump's appointed border czar, told NBC News that Newsom and Bass had created 'a sanctuary for criminals' and suggested the governor and mayor could be arrested if they impeded law enforcement. 'I'll say about anybody,' Homan said, 'it's a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It's a felony to impede law enforcement from doing their job.' Homan said 'around 150' undocumented immigrants had been detained in the last two days as Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers carried out large-scale sweep across the city. In an interview with NBC News' 'Meet the Press,' Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said he would not accept campaign donations from Elon Musk, but urged the former Trump adviser to 'get involved right now in a more substantive way' in Democrats' push against the sweeping GOP-backed spending bill. Booker's remarks come as other Democrats have floated welcoming Musk into the Democratic Party after a feud between President Donald Trump and the tech mogul exploded into public view last week. Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., also joined moderator Kristen Welker on Sunday, defending Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard in Los Angeles as demonstrators protest federal immigration raids. 'He's trying to de-escalate all the tensions that are there,' Lankford said. 'This is an American city, and to be able to have an American city where we have people literally flying Mexican flags and saying, 'You cannot arrest us,' cannot be allowed.' He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that. President Donald Trump on Elon Musk President Donald Trump on Saturday told NBC News there would be 'serious consequences' if tech mogul Elon Musk funds candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of his sweeping budget bill, after a breakdown in relations between the two. Trump's comments were the most extensive since he and Musk exchanged threats and attacks on X and Truth Social earlier this week. He added that he thought the Republican Party was more unified than ever after the two men fell out in front of the world. Back in the USA: Trump told NBC News that it wasn't his decision to bring mistakenly deported Maryland man Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the U.S. to face federal charges, but said he believes it will be a 'very easy case.' Abrego Garcia's case has raised a number of questions, including what the political fallout will be. Lines redrawn: Democrats are making gains in wealthier, whiter and more educated areas as Republicans make inroads with Hispanic and white working-class voters, an analysis of election data shows. Treatment halted: Trump's travel ban has stalled lifesaving treatment for Haitian children who need to travel for surgery. A U.S. doctor who has operated on Haitian children is pleading for the administration to make a humanitarian exception to the ban. The No. 2 seeds for both the men's and women's finals at Roland-Garros came out on top this year. In three sets, Coco Gauff became the first American women to win the French open since Serena Williams in 2015, outlasting top-ranked Aryna Sabalenka with a 6-7 (5), 6-2, 6-4 victory. 'The crowd really helped me today. You guys were cheering for me so hard, and I don't know what I did to deserve so much love from the French crowd,' Gauff said. 'But I appreciate you guys.' In the men's final, Carlos Alcaraz produced one of the greatest comebacks in the history of the clay-court tournament. The defending champion made a stunning comeback from two sets down, winning a fifth-set tiebreaker to beat No. 1 Jannik Sinner 4-6, 6-7 (4), 6-4, 7-6 (3), 7-6 (10-2) to retain his French Open title for a second-straight year. It was the longest-ever French Open final — 5 hours, 29 minutes — in the Open Era. 'Wicked' star Cynthia Erivo, a Grammy, Emmy and Tony award-winning actress and singer, is slated to host the 78th annual Tony Awards, which this year return to New York City's Radio City Music Hall. There are 29 shows on Broadway that received nominations this season, with tight competition in many categories, and the acting categories are stacked with Hollywood stars, including George Clooney and Sarah Snook. NBC News will be covering the Tonys live. Follow our coverage here. Colombian senator and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay is fighting for his life after he was shot three times during a campaign event in Bogotá on Saturday. A Cantonese opera inspired by Trump has debuted its latest edition, riffing on the president's infamous White House sparring match with Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz vowed to block an aid vessel carrying Greta Thunberg and other activists from reaching Gaza, by 'any means necessary.' Did you know you are more likely to be struck by lightning than the Pacers were to win their playoff comebacks? These stats back up that claim. A U.S. marshal was mistakenly detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Arizona because he 'fit the general description of a subject being sought by ICE,' officials said. A Seattle man was charged in connection with a series of robberies and burglaries of current and former professional athletes, with alleged victims including Seattle Mariners pitcher Luis Castillo, center fielder Julio Rodriguez and Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Blake Snell. Just how much damage did Ukraine do in its 'Spiderweb' drone attack on Russia? NBC News has analyzed satellite imagery to dig into the claims being made by Kyiv and Moscow. Multiple people were injured after a small plane carrying 20 people crashed in Tullahoma, Tennessee, authorities said. This article was originally published on