By Audrea Decker, Executive Director of the Pro-Family Legislative Network

Tennessee lawmakers just passed legislation that pro-life Americans nationwide should find deeply troubling. The so-called “Fertility Treatment and Contraceptive Protection Act” (HB 533 / SB 449), signed into law by Gov. Bill Lee (R) on April 24, is being hailed by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as a victory for “reproductive freedom” and a means to limit “political intrusion.” But beneath the surface, this new law undermines Tennessee’s long-standing pro-life practices long opposed by those who believe life begins at conception.

Rep. Chris Todd (R), along with ten other legislators, signed a letter to Gov. Lee urging him to veto the legislation, but he failed to do so, consistent with his track record of not vetoing a single bill to date.

This is not just a Tennessee issue. The fact that Tennessee—a deeply pro-life state—has enshrined this bill into law could pave the way for conservative states across the country to make the same dangerous mistake.

You cannot legislate on reproductive technologies or contraception without first addressing the most fundamental question: When does life begin? For pro-life Americans, the answer is clear—life begins at fertilization. That belief is the cornerstone of laws that protect the unborn.

Pro-life Tennessee lawmakers had a real opportunity to approach reproductive technologies and contraception with care — protecting unborn life while still ensuring parents have access to innovative medical options. But this bill falls far short of that goal.

Let’s examine why this legislation is so problematic.

First, this law creates a statutory right to create and genetically test embryos—with no safeguards.

Your embryos — precious, often limited, and possibly your only chance at biological children — should receive ultimate protection. However, in vitro fertilization (IVF) routinely entails the destruction of embryos after genetic testing, if those embryos are deemed “undesirable.” This bill imposes no requirements for safekeeping and fails to clarify whether embryos can be destroyed without consent, through negligence, or who bears responsibility.

Further, the bill directly contradicts Tennessee’s existing pro-life laws that recognize an embryo as a person and stipulate prenatal non-discrimination. These laws are critical to ensure babies are not discarded because of their sex, race, or disability.

Rep. Gino Bulso (R) explained during floor debate that three sections of Tennessee Code recognize embryos as human life; TCA 39-13-107 and TCA 39-13-214 define unborn children as persons at any stage of gestation, while TCA 39-15-213 recognizes life beginning at fertilization.

Rep. Bulsoemphasized, “At fertilization, we bring into existence a new human being. We have all 46 chromosomes, the entire genetic makeup of a human person. Eye color is determined, hair color is determined, every genetic trait that a person later develops is there from the moment of fertilization, also known as conception, forward—which is why we outlaw abortion even at the embryonic stage.”

He added, “If you were to concede that you could kill an embryo, then you have given up any scientific argument to outlaw abortion at any further portion of a pregnancy. Because from fertilization forward, you have the same kind of being.”

That’s the slippery slope Tennessee has just stepped onto. By ignoring the personhood of embryos and endorsing practices that facilitate their destruction, this bill undermines all laws that protect life from the moment of conception.

Meanwhile, researchers are already exploring ethically fraught uses of embryos in experimental technologies, including as a power source to fuel artificial intelligence. Though it sounds like science fiction, this is already underway.

Second, this law codifies access to abortion-inducing drugs.

During debate, bill sponsor Rep. Iris Rudder (R) confirmed that “emergency contraception” in the bill includes Plan B, the “morning-after pill.” Many pro-life voters would be stunned to learn that their Republican representatives just voted to affirm and protect access to such drugs.

However, since this language was wrapped inside a bill labeled “Fertility Treatment and Contraceptive Protection Act,” it becomes easier to obfuscate the real impact. Some lawmakers may not have even realized what they were voting for. Will the rest of the pro-life community in Tennessee and elsewhere know the difference?

Maybe that’s exactly the strategy. Progressive organizations such as the ACLU don’t support pro-life bills—they support bills that advance their radical agenda. Their endorsement of this legislation should have been a red flag.

Other states have taken steps to address IVF-related uncertainty. For example, Alabama legislators clarified in statute that IVF providers cannot be held criminally liable for the death or damage of an embryo, but are still vulnerable to civil liability. Georgia enacted simple language this session ensuring that IVF remains legal without undermining other pro-life statutes.

Tennessee went much further. Rather than clarifying existing laws or protecting parents and embryos, Tennessee legislators created broad new “rights” to abortion-inducing drugs and reproductive technologies that could be used to pressure insurance providers and employers. Moreover, it could violate the religious or moral beliefs of Tennesseans who object to the destruction of unborn life.

The Bottom Line

Tennessee’s law may have been crafted with good intentions—to support families and ensure access to fertility treatments—but its consequences are dangerous. It permits genetic testing that leads to embryo destruction, creates new rights to use drugs like Plan B, and stands in direct contradiction to Tennessee laws that have protected life from the moment of fertilization for decades.

Ultimately, this law has substantially weakened the very statutes that have made Tennessee a national leader in the pro-life movement. Unless pro-life advocates speak up, other states may now follow Tennessee’s example. Lawmakers in other states should see Tennessee’s new law as a cautionary tale, not a blueprint. And Tennessee lawmakers must act swiftly next session to undo the damage before it spreads.

If you would like assistance with similar legislation in your state, please reach out to us at PFLN. We are here to assist you.