Tennessee Lawmakers Advance Bill to Punish Certain Immigrants Who Stay or Return Illegally

The proposed legislation would impose state-level penalties on immigrants who remain in or reenter the state after receiving a final federal removal order.

Published on Feb. 11, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A Tennessee bill that would make it a Class A misdemeanor for certain immigrants who have received a final federal removal order to intentionally remain in the state or unlawfully reenter Tennessee after being deported cleared a House subcommittee on Wednesday. The bill, sponsored by House Majority Leader William Lamberth, is part of a broader 'Immigration 2026' package proposed by Republican leaders in the state.

Why it matters

The proposed legislation is intended to protect Tennesseans' rights and safety, but it faces legal hurdles as it would only take effect if federal law changes or the U.S. Supreme Court restores states' authority to enforce rules on illegal presence, effectively reversing the precedent set in Arizona v. United States.

The details

House Bill 1704 would impose state-level penalties on adults who have received a final federal removal order and intentionally remain in Tennessee, or who unlawfully reenter the state after being deported. The penalty carries up to 11 months and 29 days in jail. The bill includes a section targeting people who reenter Tennessee after being deported, but it would only take effect if federal law changes or the U.S. Supreme Court restores states' authority to enforce rules on illegal presence.

  • The bill cleared a House subcommittee on Wednesday, February 11, 2026.
  • The bill is scheduled for a House Judiciary Committee hearing on February 18, 2026.

The players

William Lamberth

House Majority Leader, R-Portland, who sponsored House Bill 1704.

Arizona v. United States

A Supreme Court case that effectively limited states' authority to enforce rules on illegal presence.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We must not let individuals continue to damage private property in San Francisco.”

— Robert Jenkins, San Francisco resident (San Francisco Chronicle)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.