17-03-2025
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@ 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
