A RESOLUTION relative to tariffs invalidly imposed under the International Emergency Powers Act.

The bill HJR1073 is a resolution that emphasizes the importance of U.S. laws and court decisions regarding tariffs. It states that if tariffs are found to be invalid, the federal government should not keep any money collected from those tariffs. Essentially, it seeks to ensure that taxpayers are not unfairly burdened by invalid tariffs.

TN HJR1073 is a house bill in the Tennessee 114th General Assembly, sponsored by John Clemmons (D), currently “Introduced” since March 4, 2026.

We track 9,160 Tennessee bills this session, 75 of them sponsored by John Clemmons.

Supporters of HJR1073 would argue that this resolution protects taxpayers by ensuring that the federal government cannot unjustly benefit from invalid tariffs. They would highlight the importance of upholding legal precedents that safeguard citizens' rights and promote fairness in government financial practices.

Critics of HJR1073 might argue that the resolution is unnecessary and could undermine the federal government's ability to manage economic policy effectively. They may contend that it distracts from more pressing issues and that the focus should be on broader economic strategies rather than specific tariff disputes.

The bill HJR1073 addresses tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Powers Act and seeks to clarify the federal government's obligations regarding funds collected from invalid tariffs. The sponsor, John Clemmons, has a background as an attorney and is a partner at a law firm, but there are no direct financial interests in industries that would be affected by this bill. His personal financial interests primarily revolve around legal services and investments, none of which directly correlate with the foreign trade and international finance subject matter of the bill. Additionally, while he has various roles in educational and community organizations, these do not present a conflict with the bill's intent or implications.

Given that there are no documented personal financial interests that would benefit from the legislation, the risk of a conflict of interest is low. The lack of overlap between the sponsor's financial interests and the bill's subject matter indicates that there is minimal potential for personal financial gain from the passage of HJR1073. Therefore, the analysis concludes that the sponsor's personal financial interests do not pose a significant conflict with the legislation.

Unlike federal analysis based on campaign donations, state analysis examines legislators' personal financial interests — their jobs, businesses, and investments.

Items marked "AI-researched" are generated from public sources but have not been independently verified. Verified data is sourced from official legislature websites and disclosure filings.