U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) criticized Democratic leaders and city officials across the country for what she described as efforts to obstruct Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations during a recent episode of her podcast, Unmuted with Marsha.

In the latest installment, Blackburn interviewed former Acting ICE Director Jonathan Fahey to discuss increasing threats against ICE agents, deportation policy reforms, and legislative proposals aimed at bolstering law enforcement protections.

Blackburn argued that cities such as Nashville, Los Angeles, Boston, and Chicago are impeding ICE’s efforts to detain and remove undocumented immigrants who have committed crimes. “People do not want Tren de Aragua, MS-13, violent gangs in their neighborhoods and communities,” Blackburn said. “They not only want them out; they want them out fast.”

The Tennessee senator specifically raised concerns about the alleged doxxing of Homeland Security investigators and ICE agents in Nashville, calling for greater safeguards for officers targeted by transnational gangs.

Blackburn highlighted two pieces of legislation she is sponsoring: the REMOVE Act, which she said would expedite deportations of noncitizens with criminal convictions, and the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act, aimed at shielding officers’ personal information from public release.

Fahey, who served as acting ICE director under the Trump administration, echoed Blackburn’s concerns, warning that anti-ICE rhetoric and policy resistance from some city governments may undermine public safety and embolden violent criminal networks.

The podcast episode adds to Blackburn’s ongoing efforts to position herself as a strong supporter of immigration enforcement and law enforcement protections, as she prepares for reelection in a state where border security remains a top issue for conservative voters.

By now, most conservative voters in Tennessee expected Governor Bill Lee to deliver sweeping conservative reforms across the board. He came in promising to cut taxes, empower parents in education, and protect traditional values—and he had two terms to make it happen. Yet after six years, the results fall short.

First, take education—a defining issue for conservatives. Lee staked much on universal school vouchers and charter expansion. But his universal voucher proposal failed in 2024 amid objections over its cost and questionable structure—even from deeply conservative rural Republicans wary of siphoning funds from fragile public schools. He backed a school voucher program in 2019, only to have it struck down by courts. Despite touting his “Education Freedom Act” in a special session yahoo.com+1chalkbeat.org+1, the more comprehensive universal plan has yet to clear legislature and seems to have dissipated as a focal point.

On social issues, Lee has been more style than substance. He signed Tennessee’s first drag-ban law in March 2023, but it was quickly enjoined as unconstitutional. The sticky government involvement in schools—mandating “outing” of trans‑identifying students to parents—while controversial, offers little forward motion beyond grievance signaling theguardian.com. Conservatives see virtue signaling; but real gains feel lacking.

Tax and regulatory reforms are similarly half‑measures. Yes, Lee championed the bank tax repeal and corporate tax breaks—$400 million annually, plus a $1.55 billion rebate payout. Yet many grassroots conservatives focused more than anything on issues like education, immigration, and inflation—making these fiscal moves feel like background noise. As conservative activist Jody Barrett told The Guardian, corporate tax cuts barely registered amid the wider legislative distractions.

Gun policy presents the clearest accomplishment—permitless carry legislation was signed. But conservatives view Lee’s response post‑Covenant shooting as cautious at best. He didn’t call for new gun restrictions, but neither did he push bold reforms—just a special session and minor tweaks. For a movement calling for decisive leadership, this felt tepid.

Perhaps the biggest blot, though, was the ethics scandal. Lee’s keynote trip to a Florida conference funded by the Alliance Defending Freedom—later lumped into an ADF lobby arm—prompted an ethics violation and repayment order from Tennessee’s Ethics Commission. Even Republicans voiced frustration, calling it a needless distraction from his legislative agenda.

So what have conservative voters been left with? A drag-ban that likely won’t survive court challenge, a voucher plan that stalled, corporate tax relief mostly ignored by the electorate, and an ethics scandal that undermines his moral authority. Bill Lee ran as a forceful conservative—but two terms in, conservatives are asking: where’s the tangible legacy?

It’s not damning to call Lee a moderate: he won broad bipartisan appeal. But that appeal often meant dialing back the bold conservative reforms his base wanted. Rural conservatives, in particular, wanted a partner who would aggressively champion constitutional principles, limited government, and parental control in schools—not one who repeatedly conceded to legislative caution or would drag out voucher fights.

Bill Lee’s brand is safe. His style is calm. But conservative voters aren’t clamoring for safe—they’re looking for impact. And after six years, his track record looks more like maintenance than transformation.

Tennessee education officials are considering a rule change that would allow schools to more quickly remove disruptive students with disabilities from their classrooms, even without a formal behavioral assessment.

Currently, a 2022 state rule requires schools to conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) to understand the reasons behind disruptive behavior before making changes to a student’s educational placement. The proposed change would allow temporary placements in more restrictive settings for students identified as a “disruptive force.”

While some disability advocates support the proposal for safety reasons, they caution that it should be a last resort. Jeff Strand, public policy director for the Tennessee Disability Coalition, emphasized that decisions to move a student should involve their family and IEP team, and such actions should not become routine.

Strand also highlighted that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires collaboration with families on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for eligible students. He warned that premature or repeated restrictive placements could violate students’ rights and hinder their educational progress.

The board discussed the proposal in May following concerns from local school districts regarding significantly dangerous or disruptive behavior from students with disabilities. J.C. Bowman, executive director of the Professional Educators of Tennessee, noted the increasing behavioral challenges in classrooms and stressed the importance of ensuring that any placement changes support the ongoing education and needs of the student.