Republican supermajority passes bills to 'dismantle' DEI in state, local government
Two bills barring state and local governments, school districts and public colleges and universities from having diversity, equity and inclusion offices and considering race, ethnicity, sex or age in employment decisions will go to Gov. Bill Lee for his signature.
The 'Dismantling DEI Departments Act' and the 'Dismantle DEI in Employment Act' are meant to align Tennessee with the priorities of President Donald Trump's administration, according to Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, a Franklin Republican and the senate sponsor of both bills.
The Republican supermajority's passage of the bills came over the staunch opposition of their Democratic colleagues — many of whom are minorities — who recounted their personal experiences facing hiring discrimination because of their race or ethnicity.
Johnson and House sponsor, Clarksville Republican Rep. Aron Maberry, said diversity is beneficial but DEI is a form of discrimination and enforces 'ideological viewpoints.' They said the bills aim to center merit, qualifications, skill and competency in employment decisions, and diversity will 'happen naturally through fair hiring practices.'
'The big problem in DEI is equity. We all know diversity, we all love including people. Equity is not equality, and it's not about treating people fairly or ensuring equal opportunity … equity in the context of DEI is essentially that everybody gets the same outcome,' Maberry said.
Sen. Raumesh Akbari, a Memphis Democrat, said it is 'funny' people believe they live in a post-racial society.
'Because, quite frankly, as much as we aspire for the ideals of Dr. King, where people are not judged by the color of their skin but the content of their character, that is not the case,' Akbari said.
Sen. Raumesh Akbari and Rep. Antonio Parkinson, both Memphis Democrats, speak to one another as the House considers the "Dismantling DEI Departments Act" on April 22, 2025. (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)
House Majority Leader William Lamberth gives a thumbs down motion as Memphis Democratic Rep. Justin Pearson look on. (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)
Clarksville Republican Rep. Aron Maberry sponsored a pair of bills aiming to "dismantle DEI" in state and local agencies, saying DEI is a form of discrimination and enforces 'ideological viewpoints.' (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)
Memphis Democratic Rep. Antonio Parkinson speaks against the passage of the "Dismantling DEI Departments Act" on the House floor on April. 22, 2025. (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout)
Nashville Democratic Rep. Vincent Dixie speaks against the "Dismantling DEI Departments Act" on the House floor on April 22, 2025. (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout ©2025)
Sen. London Lamar, a Memphis Democrat, said DEI initiatives are meant to address groups of people who are fully qualified but have been excluded from access to resources and jobs.
'You can't even be considered for these jobs if you don't meet the basic criteria,' Lamar said Tuesday. 'So the idea that people are being chosen based on their race or their gender is false.'
The Senate passed both bills Tuesday. The House passed the 'Dismantling DEI Departments Act' Tuesday, and passed its counterpart last week after the bill's supporters cut debate short.
'Many of us were denied the opportunity to even speak and represent our people,' Democratic Caucus Leader Rep. Karen Camper said Tuesday. 'Not only were we silenced, but really it almost felt like we (were dismissed). It was a lot of laughter and smugness, as if our lived experience of discrimination and injustice in this country were nothing more than some political talking points.'
The 'Dismantling DEI Departments Act' prohibits state and local governments, public institutions of higher education, and governor-appointed boards from using 'a discriminatory preference in an effort to increase diversity, equity, or inclusion or maintain an office, division, or department for such purposes.'
Decisions that grant or withhold benefits must be based on 'individual merit, qualifications, veteran status or lawful eligibility criteria,' according to the bill. The legislation also scrubs Tennessee Code of provisions that encourage support of women- and minority-owned businesses and goals for including minorities on appointed boards.
The act exempts demographic-based outreach for medically substantiated reasons in public health, medical research or disease prevention programs, in addition to 'lawful and neutral outreach programs that ensure equal access to state services or contracting' as long as there is no demographic-based 'preferential treatment.'
Entities can also submit written notice to the state comptroller requesting an exemption if complying with the act would cause the loss of federal funding.
The 'Dismantle DEI in Employment Act' prohibits government entities in Tennessee from 'considering race, ethnicity, sex, age, or any other demographic characteristic' in employment decisions.
It contains the same exemption request process for instances that would jeopardize federal funding.
Johnson and Maberry said neither bill will affect existing state laws or programs that support people with disabilities.
Rep. Harold Love, Jr., a Nashville Democrat, said the legislation has implications beyond the printed word. Love described a 'chilling effect': people who are hiring may reconsider selecting minorities for roles even if they are qualified, because they don't want to be perceived as breaking these laws.
The Senate rejected an amendment proposed by Nashville Democratic Sen. Jeff Yarbro that would have prohibited hiring on the basis of familial relationship, past or present political activity, campaign involvement, service as an elected official, financial contributions and referrals by elected officials, political appointees or campaign representatives that were not based on merit.
Johnson said those issues were already covered by two pieces of legislation regarding state government employment. In rejecting the amendment, the legislature declined to extend these rules to local governments and educational institutions throughout the state.
Yarbro said some of the pieces of Tennessee Code eliminated or re-written by this legislation had been on the books for decades.
'Using this political cudgel that's been developed in the last three or four years as a rationale to go back in time and repeal progress that was made in the 70s, 80s and 90s? We shouldn't do that,' Yarbro said.
The House rejected an amendment proposed by Rep. Larry Miller, a Memphis Democrat, that would have required reporting on hirings and firings based on merit broken down by demographic. Miller argued the amendment should be welcome if the supermajority thought it would prove their justification for the bill.
Using this political cudgel that's been developed in the last three or four years as a rationale to go back in time and repeal progress that was made in the 70s, 80s and 90s? We shouldn't do that.
– Sen. Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville
Johnson, when pressed by Lamar for examples of situations in which someone has been hired based on race or gender over merit, said he had examples but could not disclose them.
'If you've not been contacted by someone who feels like they were overlooked because of diversity, I don't know what to say about that,' Johnson said.
Asked if Black people or women currently employed by state or local governmental entities were hired based on their qualifications or their demographics, Johnson said he believes they were hired because they were qualified, but the DEI movement has become 'insidious.'
The legislation does not infringe on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he said, noting he is 'glad (those protections) are there.'
'Diversity is a good thing, but diversity for diversity's sake alone is not a good thing,' Johnson said.
Several representatives later said on the house floor that they do not know of any Black man who has gotten a job who was not qualified for that position.
Rep. Antonio Parkinson, a Memphis Democrat, said DEI is not meant to put one group of people above another.
'It is simply to show you that we exist,' he said. 'It removes the invisible cloak from veterans, disabled individuals, Black people, women and others. We exist.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
15 minutes ago
- Axios
Exclusive: Sen. Slotkin prepared to go "nuclear" over Texas redistricting
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) says she's not going to fight "with one arm tied behind" her back as Texas Republicans pursue a Trump-backed mid-decade redistricting. The big picture: The rumbles of redistricting are causing heartburn on the Hill, Axios' Andrew Solender reported, as Democrats weigh how to respond in political self-defense. As House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters Thursday, "It's all options on the table at this moment." Slotkin appeared Wednesday at an Axios News Shapers event in Washington, D.C. Driving the news: "If they're going to go nuclear in Texas, I'm going to go nuclear in other places," she told Axios' Stephen Neukam. "I'm not going to ... fight with one arm tied behind my back," she continued. "I don't want to do that, but if they're proposing to rig the game ... we're going to get in that game and fight." State of play: Trump earlier this month floated a "simple redrawing" to "pick up five seats" in Texas.


The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
In the Epstein saga, it's Trump against America
On the long list of Republicans' recent disgraces, Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) decision to shut down the House until September rather than allow a vote to release Jeffrey Epstein's files may be at the very top. Apparently the people who urged Americans to ' do your own research ' on vaccines really don't want you thumbing through information on Epstein. Johnson's spineless play is one more MAGA middle finger to a public that just wants Congress to keep its word. What makes this retreat truly shameful is the fact that Republicans aren't doing any of this for some lofty moral purpose. Their stop-work order doesn't represent the desires of MAGA voters, a majority of whom want the Epstein files released. It doesn't prevent a bad law from passing or draw attention to an injustice being committed on the House floor. Rather, Johnson and his Republican colleagues have decided that whatever is in the Epstein files is worse for them than the hell they're currently catching from voters. That says a lot, because President Trump's handling of the Epstein scandal is absolutely toxic with almost every group in America. Only 40 percent of Republicans approve of Trump's handling of the files, while some of the president's top MAGA influencers now openly wonder why he's working so hard to protect information about one of the country's most notorious pedophiles. At just 38 percent approval, Trump is approaching a level of unpopularity he hasn't felt since early 2017, as voters struggle to make sense of his abrupt about-face. Republican lawmakers aren't having much luck figuring out Trump's motives, either. They've given up even trying to defend his bizarre claim that Epstein's crimes were a hoax financed by Democrats. Instead, they've turned off the lights on Capitol Hill and sprinted away. Voters are right to be suspicious. 'We should get real answers on what happened to Jeffrey Epstein. All of that should be open to the public, it should be absolutely transparent,' Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told Fox News in 2023. But Kennedy, who made several trips on Epstein's private jet, now refuses to answer questions. In 2021, future Vice President JD Vance implied that anyone fighting to keep Epstein's files secret could be a potential client. 'What possible interest would the US government have in keeping Epstein's clients secret?' he added. It's a great question that still demands an answer. Last week, the White House introduced its latest effort to delegitimize whatever horrors are hidden in the pages it still refuses to reveal. In an Oval Office press conference, Trump authorized Attorney General Pam Bondi to release ' whatever is credible ' from files he claimed a day before didn't exist at all. By floating the idea that some of Epstein's files could be fake, Trump is setting the stage to invalidate any references to him in the documents — if those specific pages are even allowed to see the light of day. What must be going through Johnson's head as he directs House Republicans to sink bill after bill ordering the release of Epstein's files? Johnson has long made his Christian faith a centerpiece of his public identity, to the point of questioning whether religion should even be separate from government. Yet his desire to lead Congress with Christian morality was no match for Trump, who seemingly co-opted Johnson into his cover-up scheme without a whisper of resistance from the Speaker. Johnson's decision to walk off the job and away from the business of the American people is jarring even by the low standards of the Trump era. After whining for an entire campaign season that Democrats weren't working hard enough, Johnson's Republicans have passed fewer laws and worked less than any Congress in decades. Cornered by Epstein drama of their own making, Johnson's Republicans are no longer even pretending to do their jobs. Congressional Republicans no longer serve the American people at large, or even their own conservative constituents. They serve — or in the case of Johnson's early recess, don't serve — in whatever way best protects Trump's personal and political interests. If that means hiding Epstein's heinous crimes from public accountability and denying closure to his many victims, so be it. Johnson's decision to shutter the House in order to protect Trump reveals a Congress in an advanced state of decay and a Republican Party willing to rationalize any evil in the name of protecting its strongman. What other horrors will Mike Johnson bury in order to keep his morally bankrupt party afloat? Max Burns is a veteran Democratic strategist and founder of Third Degree Strategies.


Boston Globe
15 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Republican incumbent Ruais stands alone in Manchester, N.H., mayoral race — for now
Advertisement That leaves lingering questions about whether the Democrats will field a viable candidate or give Ruais an unobstructed path to another two-year term. Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up Although the mayoral race is nominally nonpartisan, leading contenders typically align openly with either Republicans or Democrats. The off-year contest has historically been viewed as a potential indicator for how voter sentiments might be shifting ahead of the following year's state and federal elections — so the absence of a Democratic challenger at this stage is striking. That said, the Democratic absence won't persist much longer, according to Joshua F. Query, chairperson for the Manchester City Democrats, who said the party's preferred mayoral candidate will step forward Thursday. Who will that candidate be? Query declined to say. It looks like Kevin J. Cavanaugh, who lost to Ruais last time, won't make the 2025 race a repeat of the 2023 matchup. Cavanaugh has instead filed to run this year for the Ward 1 aldermanic seat he used to hold. Advertisement Whoever jumps into the mayoral race with Ruais will have their work cut out for them. The incumbent's campaign has reported raising more than $500,000 since January, with 90 percent of that haul still sitting in his war chest. This story appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, a free newsletter focused on New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles elsewhere. To receive it via email Monday through Friday, Steven Porter can be reached at