Tennessee has never been a state that locks people up because the government says so. We have been a state that requires the government to prove its case.
That is the promise in Article I, Section 15 of our state Constitution: Every person charged with a crime is bailable by sufficient sureties, except in a capital case where the proof is evident or the presumption of guilt is great. That provision has stood, in substance, since 1796.
For 230 years, Tennesseans have trusted judges to set conditions that get people back to court and protect the public. This has never required a change to our Constitution – and it certainly does not now.
Supporters will tell you this is about public
safety and really only addresses the worst of the worst. I urge you to read the fine print.
The fine print tells a different story
While the amendment does specify a short list of heinous crimes, including terrorism, second-degree murder, aggravated rape of a child, aggravated rape and grave torture, it seems to purposely gloss over the actual change to the Tennessee Constitution.
That change is buried as the seventh item on the list: a catch-all provision covering any offense on the books as of November 3, 2026, for which a person, if convicted, could not be released until at least 85% of the sentence is served.
What the ballot description does not tell you is that this broad provision has the potential to cover a lot more than six crimes.
This is much bigger than six crimes
Under Tennessee’s truth-in-sentencing law, that 85% catch-all category covers more than 70 offenses and charging variants. Other studies have found that there are actually well over 100 offenses on the list.
Amendment 1 would allow a judge to deny bail to any person merely accused of one of those crimes, detaining them before a jury has heard a word of evidence. That is not only poor public safety policy, but also a wholesale surrender of our liberty and freedom.
Judges already have tools to keep Tennesseans safe
Judges already have a wide range of tools they can use at their discretion to keep the public safe and ensure the appearance of the accused. It is important to remember that they can already detain a defendant in a capital case when the proof is evident. Judges are also currently able to revoke a defendant’s existing bond for violating conditions of release.
What they cannot do today – and should never be allowed to do – is warehouse people who have not been convicted of a crime in county-funded jails, based on an all-encompassing list of offenses created by a poorly-written constitutional amendment in a misguided attempt at public safety.
Tennesseans should not conflate public safety with giving up their precious right to bail. A person sitting in a county jail for months, not convicted, has not been found guilty of anything. It is important to understand that this is not about just some hardened criminals being detained without bail. The people who could get caught up in this detention catch-all could include your child, spouse or even your parents.
Voters should think twice before surrendering this right
That is not what Tennessee is about. Our state has stood for preserving constitutional rights for more than two centuries. We have refused to bargain away these sacred rights since Tennessee’s first constitution was written.
Amendment 1 would change that balance by allowing people to be detained without bail based solely on an accusation, before a jury has heard the evidence.
Tennesseans have protected both public safety and the presumption of innocence since 1796. The question before voters on Nov. 3 is whether we are willing to surrender a constitutional protection that has stood for 230 years.
State Sen. Raumesh Akbari represents Memphis in the Tennessee Senate and serves as Senate Democratic leader.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Tennessee Amendment 1 puts a 230-year right to bail at risk | Opinion
