Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Composition And Dei Policies topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill to bar race‑based board composition policies after Supreme Court ruling
Summary
House Bill 12,37 would prohibit excluding people from state regulatory and health boards on the basis of race, color, ethnicity or national origin and creates a private right of action; the committee approved the bill 6–2 after debate about diversity and litigation risks.
The Departments & Agencies Committee voted to advance House Bill 12,37, which would prohibit state regulatory and health boards from excluding people from membership on the basis of race, color, ethnicity or national origin and would create a private cause of action for violations.
Deputy Speaker Zachary, sponsor of the bill, said the measure is intended to align Tennessee boards with the June 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. “The bill prohibits the exclusion of persons from membership on state regulatory and health boards on the basis of race, color, ethnicity and national origin,” Zachary said. He told the committee the state is being sued because some boards are not in line with that Supreme Court ruling and said the legislation is a step to bring those boards into compliance.
Representative Miller pushed back, arguing diversity can improve health outcomes and questioning whether the Legislature should preempt the Attorney General’s defense in ongoing litigation. “Diversity allows for more understanding of a different population needs, cultural perspectives, communication styles, leading to more effective messaging, improved engagement ... and ultimately better health outcomes for diverse communities,” Miller said. Miller also asked how many health‑related regulatory boards exist; a committee member replied there are “about 24 regulatory boards in the state of Tennessee,” and provided a demographic breakdown the sponsor cited as 72% white, 16% Black and 2% Hispanic/Latino.
Zachary replied the Supreme Court ruling requires boards to appoint members on merit rather than on race or quotas and that the legislation is needed because the state is subject to lawsuits for noncompliance. The committee rejected a motion to end debate without a final vote and then advanced the bill on a recorded vote of 6 ayes and 2 noes.
The transcript records no amendments. The bill will move to the full committee. The committee did not provide bill text changes in the record; the transcript shows debate focused on legal exposure, DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) policies, and demographic data the sponsor said were tied to the lawsuit.
