WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 2106

Teachers, Principals and School Personnel - As introduced, adds former students to those students with which an educator is subject to licensure discipline for engaging in sexually related behavior; removes the optional penalty of licensure discipline for an educator who breaks a contract with a local board of education without a justifiable reason. - Amends TCA Title 49.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026)

Tennessee law now prohibits educators from any sexually related conduct with former students and mandates licensure discipline for unjustified contract breaches.

Transmitted to Governor for action.
#principalsandschoolpersonnel #teachers
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 2106

Legislative bill overview

SB 2106 expands Tennessee's educator licensure discipline rules by including former students in the category of individuals with whom educators are prohibited from engaging in sexually related behavior. The bill also removes the optional nature of licensure discipline for educators who break employment contracts without justifiable cause, making such discipline mandatory.

Why is this important

This legislation directly addresses educator misconduct by closing a potential loophole regarding relationships with former students and strengthens accountability mechanisms for contract violations. The changes affect hiring, retention, and professional standards across Tennessee's public education system and could influence how other states approach educator licensing standards.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope of "former students": The bill doesn't clearly define temporal or age limits—it's unclear whether this applies to former students of any age or if there's a minimum time requirement after graduation, potentially creating enforcement ambiguity.
  • Mandatory vs. discretionary discipline: Removing the optional penalty eliminates administrative flexibility in contract-breaking cases, which may result in disproportionate consequences for educators in difficult personal circumstances versus those with intentional misconduct.
  • Definitional clarity on "sexually related behavior": The amendment references existing definitions but doesn't specify whether this includes grooming behavior, digital communication, or requires physical conduct, affecting how consistently it's enforced.

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

Sign in to ask a question.