Sarah Grace Taylor, Nashville Banner

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee is all-in on dismantling the U.S. Department of Education and is leaving the door open to use federal funds to support his new school voucher program.

Last week, hours before President Donald Trump signed an executive order instructing his recently-appointed Education Secretary to begin the dissolution of the federal DOE, Lee reissued his support of Trump’s plan, telling reporters the state would be better off without the federal oversight of education.

“I am one who believes that the federal Department of Education is largely a bureaucratic problem for states,” Lee said, calling the federal government “too big, too cumbersome and too bureaucratic.”

The governor, who was set to attend the executive order signing, has been supportive of Trump’s plan to dismantle the Department of Education since at least November, when he said he “hopes it looks something like block-granting the dollars to states,” comparing the idea to a Medicaid block grant waiver that Trump approved in his first term, allowing Tennessee more discretion in spending money intended for Medicaid recipients.

In an op-ed published Wednesday, Lee called the DOE an “$80 billion failure,” and said that states were better off managing federal education funding, as had been the case prior to the DOE’s formation in 1979.

When he initially endorsed Trump’s plan, Lee declined to comment on whether he would use the funds to benefit his private school voucher program, which later passed in a January special session, partly urged by Trump to address immigration. For each of the last three years, including 2025 projections, the DOE has reportedly provided Tennessee between $3.36-3.66 billion.

On Thursday, with the voucher bill signed into law and the end of the DOE in sight, Lee suggested that the legislature could conceptually tap into the DOE money for vouchers.

“The funding from the federal government shouldn’t impact that strategy,” Lee said. “It should just continue to give us the resources necessary to fund the education for all the children of the state, both public and private, through education freedom scholarships or through traditional funding to our public schools.”

Lee noted that he expects to see a “ramp up” in the voucher program, but added that “the law, as it stands today in Tennessee, is how I view that it will be going forward, until the Legislature makes a decision to change.”

Educators and parents across the country have expressed concern that a lack of federal oversight could prevent some students, like those with disabilities or special needs, from receiving adequate and fair education.

“If successful, Trump’s continued actions will hurt all students by sending class sizes soaring, cutting job training programs, making higher education more expensive and out of reach for middle-class families, taking away special education services for students with disabilities, and gutting student civil rights protections,” National Education Association President Becky Pringle said in a statement, calling supporters “anti-public education.”

Lee dismissed those concerns, arguing that the state is better equipped to manage those students than the federal government, repeating a common refrain that the states know best how to handle education.

“I don’t have one bit of concern about a lack of services or a lack of educational opportunities for children when the federal Department of Education is removed,” Lee said.

Lee’s wholesale support of a Trump plan before the details have been shared echoes his alignment with Trump’s deportation policies, which Lee loudly supported and urged other Republican governors to support before Trump was in office or had shared specifics.

On the other hand, Lee continued his streak of refusing to comment on pending Tennessee legislation when he was asked about several measures that have been through statewide legislative committees, including a bill that would allow school boards to deny undocumented students education, in a direct challenge to U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

“I can’t speak to how I feel about that, because that’s not been decided yet,” Lee said, adding that he was broadly supportive of addressing what he described as issues caused by illegal immigration, “including how they impact our education system.

Though he lacked details, the governor said ending the DOE would benefit Tennessee because more money would be spent at the state level.

“That’s more dollars directly spent on education services for children, and not on jobs in D.C.,” Lee said.

Asked if the state would have to replicate any of the administrative roles being axed in the federal department of education — or the “bureaucracy” described by Lee — the governor was unsure.

“We have no idea what’s coming,” Lee said. “We’ll know a lot more, probably after today, and then we’ll begin to plan to work with the federal government on being a good partner.”

This story was originally published by the Nashville Banner. Sign up for their newsletter.

In the latest overt challenge to Supreme Court precedent, Tennessee Republican lawmakers have introduced a bill that would allow school districts to deny undocumented students from enrolling. The bill runs counter to the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court Plyler v. Doe decision, which entitled all children to public education despite immigration status.

The bill, introduced Tuesday by Tennessee House Majority Leader Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) and state Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson), would directly challenge more than 40 years of precedent by allowing local education authorities, like school boards, to bar students without legal citizenship from attending public schools.

In an accompanying statement, Watson and Lamberth say the bill intentionally “seeks to challenge” the court decision, citing the cost of public education.

“The flood of illegal immigrants in our country has put an enormous drain on American tax dollars and resources. Our schools are the first to feel the impact,” Lamberth said. “Tennessee communities should not have to suffer or pay when the federal government fails to secure our borders. Our obligation is to ensure a high-quality education for legal residents first.”

Watson’s comments Tuesday similarly focused on the impact on public school funding.

“Our education system has limited resources, which should be prioritized for students who are legally present in the country,” Watson said. “An influx of illegal immigration can strain LEAs and put significant pressure on their budgets. This bill empowers local governments to manage their resources more effectively and builds upon the legislative action taken during the special session to address illegal immigration at the local level.”

The bill follows a four-day special legislative session that focused on increasing immigration enforcement and a $447 million school voucher plan. According to the legislature’s estimates, the voucher plan will directly remove $47 million from public school education and that amount could continue to grow.

Their arguments echo those of Rep. Gino Bulso (R-Brentwood), who introduced the “Tennessee Reduction of Unlawful Migrant Placement” or “TRUMP” Act in January, which would, among other things, require the parents of children without full citizenship to pay tuition to attend public schools. At the time, Bulso said the bill was to conserve public resources for citizens, but he also noted that such legislation can be a “disincentive for those who are considering coming into the country illegally from coming to Tennessee.”

Casey Bryant, founder and executive director of Advocates for Immigration Rights of Memphis, said that the bill is far from being enacted despite the momentum from Tennessee lawmakers who favor penalizing and deporting those without citizenship.

“I think there’s always been people who were trying to do this, and they’ve been just chomping at the bit to make it happen,” Bryant said of Tennessee lawmakers Tuesday. “Even if it gets through the Tennessee General Assembly — which will be shameful for the state — it won’t go into effect for a long time, because this gonna be wrapped up in years of litigation.”

As an immigration attorney, Bryant says the litany of recent proposed policy changes at the state and federal level have already had a cooling effect on the immigrant community, despite their citizenship status, even before the aggressive policies take place.

“I mean, people are not going out at all,” Bryant said of immigrant communities in Memphis, noting a number of people have been missing work out of fear of ICE raids.

“There is a lot of fear, and it really is sending a message across the land that this isn’t a safe place for people and they’re going to be penalized for who they are or what they look like, even people who have lawful status in the United States,” he added.

The proposal is consistent with Tennessee Republican lawmakers and Gov. Bill Lee responding to President Donald Trump’s edict for state and local governments to crackdown on immigration enforcement in recent weeks. It also highlights a growing pattern of Tennessee leadership’s willingness to push legally contentious policies with the intent of hashing it out in court.

Sen. Raumesh Akbari (D-Memphis) condemned the bill as a distraction from policies that might address public school funding and fraught with legal trouble.

“House Bill 793 isn’t just cruel — it’s unconstitutional. This isn’t a policy proposal; it’s a lawsuit, designed to deny children their right to an education and waste taxpayer dollars. Every child, no matter their background, deserves a public education,” Akbari said.

During a victory lap press conference at the end of the special session, Lamberth indicated that Republican leadership would continue to be “bold” enough to introduce bills likely to face constitutional challenges, citing an ongoing Supreme Court challenge to the state’s gender-affirming care ban for minors.

Sen. London Lamar (D-Memphis) said the policy contributes to a recent pattern of biased education decisions in Tennessee, citing local book bans that target works written by people of color, the voucher bill that opponents believe will worsen disparities in education and ongoing financial peril at Tennessee State University, the state’s oldest HBCU.

“This bill doesn’t even try to hide its prejudiced intent,” Lamar said. “Like school vouchers, which were designed in response to desegregation, this legislation cherry-picks which students deserve opportunity. We’ve seen this before, and we won’t let them drag us backward.”