WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1974

Local Education Agencies - As introduced, requires the principal of a public school in which the students named as the petitioner and respondent in an order of protection are both enrolled to remove the student who is named as the respondent from any classroom or school-sponsored event or activity shared with the student who is named as the petitioner for the period of time for which the order of protection is in effect. - Amends TCA Title 36 and Title 49.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026)

Requires Tennessee schools to physically separate students named in protection orders by removing the respondent from shared classes and school activities with the petitioner.

Comp. became Pub. Ch. 862
#localeducationagencies
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1974

Legislative bill overview

HB 1974 requires school principals to separate students involved in protection orders by removing the respondent (the student against whom the order is issued) from shared classrooms and school activities with the petitioner (the student who sought the protection order). The bill applies whenever both students are enrolled in the same public school and an active order of protection exists between them.

Why is this important

Orders of protection are legal remedies meant to prevent harassment, stalking, or abuse. This bill operationalizes those court orders within school settings, ensuring schools actively enforce separation rather than leaving it to chance. It directly affects student safety, school operations, and disciplinary procedures in Tennessee public schools.

Potential points of contention

  • Educational access vs. separation: Removing the respondent from shared classes may limit their course options, extracurricular participation, or educational opportunities, raising fairness and educational access concerns
  • Implementation burden: Schools must identify all shared classes, activities, and events, track order expiration dates, and manage logistics—creating administrative complexity and potential for inconsistent enforcement
  • Due process questions: The bill doesn't specify what happens if the respondent disputes the order's validity or what happens after it expires, and whether the respondent has input in the separation process
  • Scope ambiguity: "School-sponsored events" is undefined—does this include bus transportation, lunch periods, hallways, or only formal classes and official activities?

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

Sign in to ask a question.