Tennessee’s criminal justice reform conversation has often been loud on punishment but quieter on what actually works to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. One of the most consequential policies in recent years, the Reentry Success Act (RSA) of 2021, shifted the state’s approach to parole, supervision, and reintegration with measurable structural change (Tennessee General Assembly, 2021). But as the 2026 General Assembly approaches, proposals threatening the incentives that made the RSA effective risk undoing progress we can’t afford to lose.

The RSA was enacted with overwhelming support: it passed the legislature and was signed into law as Public Chapter 410 of 2021 (Tennessee General Assembly, 2021). The act reforms Tennessee’s parole laws and is designed to reduce recidivism by establishing a clearer, more predictable pathway to parole and community supervision for eligible incarcerated individuals. Significantly, the RSA creates a presumption of release on parole for those who meet specific criteria at their release eligibility dates and at subsequent hearings unless “good cause” is shown for denial — reversing Tennessee’s historic posture that parole was purely a privilege, not a right (Horwitz, 2021).

What that statutory language means on the ground is simple: the act gives men and women returning to society a structured, transparent path toward supervision. Previously, parole decisions were more discretionary and unpredictable — a factor that reduces motivation for participation in rehabilitative programming and leaves individuals with less structure post-release. Under the RSA, meeting pre-defined parole criteria means individuals can earn supervision, rather than being subject to subjective board decisions (Horwitz, 2021).

Reducing max-outs — people who complete their prison term without supervision — is a critical public safety goal. Research consistently links supervision to lower recidivism when paired with evidence-based supports. Tennessee’s Office of Reentry notes that recidivism for some statewide cohorts has historically reached 46% (Tennessee Office of Reentry, n.d.), illustrating the scale of the problem the RSA was designed to improve.

The RSA also includes reforms beyond parole. It incentivizes state and local investment in reentry programming by authorizing community college and technical education partnerships to support evidence-based workforce development (Justice Action Network, n.d.). It shields employers from certain civil liability claims when hiring people with criminal records and reduces administrative barriers such as occupational licensing restrictions tied solely to past convictions (Justice Action Network, n.d.).

These provisions align with national evidence on reentry supports. Contemporary research emphasizes that employment, housing stability, and community reintegration are central to long-term success. The Council of State Governments Justice Center notes that measuring reentry solely by rearrest or reincarceration masks the broader picture of what contributes to desistance, recommending metrics tied to stability and opportunity (Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2025).

Yet early discussions in the legislature for 2026 include proposals that would weaken RSA’s foundational incentives. Bills under consideration aim to broaden parole denials based on offense seriousness and expand discretionary powers of the Parole Board — a move critics argue would undermine the statutory presumption of supervision embedded in the RSA. Such changes reflect a return to a system where subjective criteria, not structured benchmarks, drive decisions with life-changing consequences (Tennessee Lookout, 2025).

This is not a philosophical debate over leniency. It is a policy question rooted in evidence. Predictability matters. When incarcerated individuals know what is required for release and how to maintain supervision, they are statistically more likely to engage in rehabilitative programming and less likely to reoffend (Horwitz, 2021). Eliminating or weakening those incentives can increase max-outs and erode structured opportunities for positive change.

Moreover, the notion that expanding discretionary denials inherently increases public safety is not strongly supported by research. A 2025 investigation of parole policy reform concluded that removing key RSA provisions would be a “step backwards from safer Tennessee communities” because it undercuts the very processes that have contributed to improved outcomes since the RSA was enacted (Tennessee Lookout, 2025).

National research supports this caution. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine observe that recidivism rates alone are an incomplete measure of success — but the broader literature consistently shows that programs offering structured supervision, mentorship, employment support, and community integration correlate with reduced re-offense and stronger long-term outcomes (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2022).

Tennessee’s RSA did not invent evidence-based reentry practices, but it institutionalized them in state law, prioritizing measurable success and reducing arbitrary denials. Backtracking now — at a moment when recent data show downward pressure on recidivism and increased investment in community support — risks destabilizing progress rooted in predictable policy design rather than rhetoric.

As lawmakers pursue 2026 reforms, the guiding question should not be “What feels tougher?” but “What makes Tennessee safer in measurable, evidence-based terms?” Weakening the RSA’s incentives does not answer that. Strengthening predictability and supervision pathways does.

Because in public policy — particularly criminal justice policy — staying the course means supporting what the evidence actually says works.

Det. Brandon Burley (Ret.), M.P.A., is a criminal justice educator whose academic work focuses on reducing recidivism through public policy. He has authored several criminal justice books and has been published in national law enforcement publications.

Follow Detective Burley on Facebook.

Follow KnoxTNToday on Facebook and Instagram. Get all KnoxTNToday articles in one place with our Free Newsletter.

References

Council of State Governments Justice Center. (2025). Beyond recidivism: Redefining measures to understand reentry success. https://csgjusticecenter.org/publications/beyond-recidivism-redefining-reentry-data-health-housing-employment/

Horwitz, D. A. (2021). The Reentry Success Act of 2021: A white paper. https://horwitz.law/wp-content/uploads/Reentry-Success-Act-of-2021-White-Paper-DAH-7-1-21.pdf

Justice Action Network. (n.d.). Tennessee legislature passes Governor Lee’s landmark criminal justice reentry reform proposals. https://www.justiceactionnetwork.org/news/tennessee-legislature-passes-governor-lees-landmark-criminal-justice-reentry-reform-proposals

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). The limits of recidivism: Measuring success after prison. The National Academies Press. https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/26459/chapter/1

Tennessee Department of Correction. (n.d.). Reentry Success Act of 2021. https://www.tn.gov/correction/rehabilitation/reentry-services/reentry-success-act.html

Tennessee General Assembly. (2021). HB 785/SB 768 — Reentry Success Act of 2021. https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0785

Tennessee Lookout. (2025). Tennessee governor issues first veto on parole authority expansion. https://tennesseelookout.com/2025/05/05/tennessee-governor-issues-first-veto-on-parole-authority-expansion/

Tennessee Office of Reentry. (n.d.). Reentry in Tennessee. https://www.tn.gov/workforce/reentrytn.html