WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SJR 3

General Assembly, Statement of Intent or Position - Establishes a definition of antisemitism and encourages departments and agencies of state government to use such definition in determining discriminatory intent for any law or policy in this state that prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin. -

114th Regular Session (2025-2026) Introduced by Mark Pody

Defines antisemitism and urges state agencies, schools, and prosecutors to treat it as evidence of discriminatory intent and consider it in enforcement and sentencing decisions.

Assigned to s/c Criminal Justice Subcommittee
#generalassembly #statementofintentorposition
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SJR 3

Summary of SJR 3 (Senate Joint Resolution 3) – Tennessee General Assembly, 114th Session

Purpose and Intent

  • SJR 3 establishes a formal definition of antisemitism and urges Tennessee state government entities to use that definition when assessing discriminatory intent under laws or policies that prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin.
  • The resolution signals the General Assembly’s position that antisemitism should be considered evidence of discriminatory intent in relevant laws, policies, and practices.

Key Provisions

Definition of Antisemitism

  • The bill provides a comprehensive definition of antisemitism, describing it as a certain perception of Jews that may manifest as hatred or a range of rhetorical and physical manifestations. It includes, but is not limited to:
    1. Calls for or justification of harming or killing Jews based on extremist ideology or views of religion.
    2. Dehumanizing or stereotyping Jews or Jewish power (including myths of a world Jewish conspiracy or control of media/economy/government).
    3. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of individuals or groups or for actions by non-Jews.
    4. Denying the Holocaust’s historical facts, scope, or mechanisms.
    5. Claiming that Jews or Israel fabricated or exaggerated the Holocaust.
    6. Allegations that Jews are more loyal to Israel than to their own country.
    7. Denying Jewish self-determination or labeling Israel’s existence as racist.
    8. Applying double standards not expected of other democratic nations.
    9. Using classic antisemitic symbols/images (e.g., blood libel) in criticism of Israel/Israelis.
    10. Comparing contemporary Israeli policy to Nazi policies.
    11. Holding Jews collectively responsible for Israel’s actions.

Administrative and Enforcement Provisions

  • State Departments and Agencies: Encourages all state departments and agencies to consider antisemitism as evidence of discriminatory intent under state laws or policies prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin.
  • Criminal Justice Considerations: Urges district attorneys general to seek enhanced sentences for defendants who commit crimes motivated by antisemitism, specifically when the crime targets a person or property due to antisemitic reasons.
  • Educational and Public Institutions: Encourages state entities, local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education receiving complaints of antisemitism on K-12 campuses or higher education settings (including via electronic outreach) to consider the defined antisemitism when determining whether the act was antisemitically motivated.

Who Is Affected

  • State government agencies and departments in Tennessee.
  • District attorneys general (for possible enhanced sentencing in antisemitism-motivated crimes).
  • K-12 public schools, local education agencies, and institutions of higher education receiving complaints of antisemitism.
  • Public colleges and universities, and students/staff involved in antisemitism-related complaints or investigations.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Legislative Status: Introduced and referred to committees; subsequently advanced through the Senate with action in Judiciary Committee and other committees; passed Senate readings and placed on a regular calendar for a vote in spring 2025.
  • Meeting History Highlights:
    • 3/13/2025: Sponsor added; placed on Senate Judiciary Committee calendar.
    • 3/17–3/18/2025: Considered by Senate Judiciary Committee; recommended for adoption.
    • 3/25/2025: Placed on Senate Regular Calendar.
    • 3/27/2025: Passed Senate (engrossed and transmitted to House); co-sponsored by Mark Pody.
  • Fiscal Impact: The fiscal note indicates a not-significant impact on state or local government operations. The analysis suggests the resolution is administrative in nature and does not create new mandatory spending or broad programmatic changes, beyond guidance and reporting.

Practical Impact and Considerations

  • The resolution provides a formal definitional framework to guide how antisemitism is identified as discriminatory intent in policy and law.
  • It may influence how discrimination cases are evaluated in state policy and education settings, potentially affecting investigations and responses to antisemitic incidents.
  • The emphasis on enhanced sentencing for antisemitism-motivated crimes could affect how prosecutors approach sentencing in relevant cases.
  • As a resolution, it expresses the General Assembly’s intent rather than creating new statutes; implementation relies on actions by agencies, schools, and prosecutors consistent with the defined antisemitism standard.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with existing Tennessee anti-discrimination statutes or summarize potential implications for specific agencies (e.g., Department of Education, Department of Justice) based on their current procedures.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.