Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, said there’s no question the incoming law “undermines science education in Tennessee public schools.”
The ACLU chapter had asked the governor to veto it.
She said terms such as “strengths and weaknesses,” and even “critical thinking,” are used by those seeking to introduce non-scientific ideas—such as creationism and intelligent design—into the science curriculum.
She added that she thought the measure could eventually be challenged in court and observers would be watching what goes on in science classrooms after it takes effect.
Senate sponsor Bo Watson acknowledged creationism and intelligent design are not part of the state’s curriculum, but he said questions about them create a “teachable moment.”
“If a student asks a question about it, the teacher should feel comfortable in using that … to say here’s the difference between science and creationism, the difference between evolution and creationism,” Watson said. “And here’s why evolution is science’s best explanation and creationism is not.”
Tennessee Education Association lobbyist Jerry Winters said the soon-to-be law sends a bad signal.
“Tennessee has a long history when you talk about the problems of teaching evolution,” he said. “And with all the emphasis on science, technology and engineering and math, it just seems to be moving totally in the wrong direction.”
See also:
- New research challenges fears about AI in the classroom - February 5, 2026
- How the FY25 funding freeze impacts students across America - July 24, 2025
- ‘Buyer’s remorse’ dogging Common Core rollout - October 30, 2014