States push phone bans — now the hard part

Michigan already passed its law, Massachusetts just moved its bill through the House by a 129-25 vote, and Tennessee is sending its own school-device measure to Governor Bill Lee’s desk. The fight is shifting from “should schools ban phones” to “who actually takes the phone, where does it go, and what happens at 10:17 a.m. when a student refuses.” (michiganpublic.org) (wcvb.com) (wsmv.com) Michigan’s law, signed by Governor Gretchen Whitmer in February 2026, requires public and charter schools to ban smartphone use during instructional time starting with the school year that begins in August 2026. The law leaves districts free to go further than class time, but it also leaves the messy part — enforcement — to local schools. (michiganpublic.org) (legislature.mi.gov) Massachusetts is trying something broader. The House bill would require school districts to implement cellphone-ban policies and would also bar children under 14 from social media, require parental consent for ages 14 and 15, and lift those restrictions at 16, with lawmakers aiming to have rules in place by October 2026. (wcvb.com) Tennessee’s bill started as something much tougher than a phone ban. The original proposal would have blocked kindergarten through fifth grade students from accessing digital devices at school and stopped teachers from using devices for instruction, but lawmakers amended it into a looser rule that tells districts to prioritize teacher-led instruction and limit devices to uses with a clear educational benefit. (capitol.tn.gov) (dailymemphian.com) That local discretion is where these laws start to split. University of Michigan researchers reviewed policies for 779 districts, covering 95% of Michigan’s publicly funded traditional and charter districts, and found that 94.7% already had some kind of cellphone mandate before the new state law even arrived. (theconversation.com) But “has a policy” and “runs the same policy every period” are not the same thing. In that Michigan review, districts used very different models: some banned phones only during class, some required them to stay out of sight, and only about 2% used lockable pouches that physically stop students from opening the phone until the day ends. (theconversation.com) Schools are also building emergency exceptions into these bans because lockdowns changed the politics of confiscating a device. Michigan’s law requires districts to set protocols for how and when students can use phones during emergencies, and one Michigan district told the state teachers carry scissors in emergency bags so they can cut open locked pouches if needed. (newsfromthestates.com) (mea.org) The national numbers show why lawmakers think the bans are worth the trouble. The National Center for Education Statistics said in February 2025 that 77% of public schools already prohibited students from using cell phones during class, and more than half of public school leaders said phones hurt academic performance. (ies.ed.gov) Researchers are now trying to measure what kind of ban works best, not whether phones are annoying. The Phones in Focus project had collected more than 68,000 teacher responses by March 2026, and the early pattern it reported was simple: stricter, school-wide rules were linked to less in-class phone use, more face-to-face interaction, and higher teacher satisfaction. (edpolicy.umich.edu) (penntoday.upenn.edu) That still leaves districts with costs and logistics the statehouse does not solve. Quincy Public Schools in Massachusetts is preparing to use locked pouches for middle and high school students, which turns a one-line ban into a budget item, a morning collection routine, an end-of-day release process, and a new argument every time a phone buzzes inside a sealed bag. (patriotledger.com) So the next year is not really about passing more bans. It is about whether principals can turn a state rule into something teachers can enforce five days a week, across every classroom door, without turning the first 15 minutes of school into airport security. (theconversation.com) (stateline.org)