Across the United States, the debate over whether students should be allowed to use smartphones in school has reached a tipping point. Concerns about distraction, mental health, and declining academic performance have led to a wave of laws aimed at limiting or banning phone use during the school day. But which states have officially acted? And how strict are these bans?
As of 2025, more than thirty states plus Washington, D.C. have passed legislation or policies restricting student phone use in classrooms, with about half enforcing full-day bans. Others only restrict devices during instructional time, while some leave it to local districts to decide.
How Many States Have Banned Cellphones in Schools?
Over the last two years, momentum has accelerated. Florida became the first state to pass a statewide law in 2023, banning phones during instructional time. Since then, states from Alabama to Nebraska have followed suit with their own policies. According to reports, at least 34 states now regulate student phone use in some form, and 18 of them, plus D.C., enforce bell-to-bell bans covering the entire school day (AP News).
California joined the movement in 2024 by requiring districts to develop restrictive policies by mid-2026 (Reuters). Nebraska recently passed one of the strictest bans, removing phones from classrooms altogether. States such as Ohio, Minnesota, and Virginia have moved toward limiting use only during class time, but still allow access in hallways or at lunch.
Examples of States with Full-Day Bans
Several states have adopted laws that require students to put away their phones throughout the entire school day. These so-called “bell-to-bell” bans are the most restrictive.
-
Alabama – Enforces an all-day ban with limited exceptions for health needs.
-
Florida – The first state to pass a law restricting phones during instruction, with stricter rules now under consideration.
-
Georgia – Requires students to keep devices stored away in designated areas.
-
Indiana – Bans phones during the school day but allows districts to determine enforcement.
-
Kentucky – Recently joined the list with a bell-to-bell policy.
-
Louisiana – Passed legislation mandating devices remain off and put away in classrooms.
-
Nebraska – A strict statewide prohibition throughout the school day.
-
North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia – Each has adopted strong restrictions that mirror the Florida model.
-
District of Columbia and Virgin Islands – Also enforce complete bans during school hours.
States Restricting Phones Only During Instruction
Not all states go as far as a full-day ban. Some target only classroom time, allowing students to check devices during breaks.
-
California – Requires every district to craft a plan that limits or bans smartphone use on campus by 2026.
-
Ohio – Districts have flexibility, but statewide rules now limit phones during instruction.
-
Minnesota – Restricts use in class but allows access at lunch or between periods.
-
South Carolina – Enforces instructional bans with exceptions for emergencies.
-
Virginia – One of the first states to test hybrid approaches before tightening restrictions further.
In total, over 30 states require schools to adopt some type of cell phone regulation, whether partial or complete.
Summary Table of Policies
| Policy Type | States Involved |
|---|---|
| Full-day bans (bell-to-bell) | Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, D.C., Virgin Islands |
| Instruction-time bans | California, Ohio, Minnesota, South Carolina, Virginia, others |
| Policy mandate, district discretion | At least 31 states have laws requiring schools to address phone use |
Why Are States Banning Phones?
The push toward phone bans stems from a mix of academic, social, and health concerns.
Academic focus: Research shows smartphones distract students, reduce concentration, and interfere with deep learning. Teachers say lessons are smoother when phones are removed.
Mental health: Excessive screen time and social media are linked to higher rates of anxiety, depression, and poor sleep among young people. Lawmakers argue limiting phones may help improve student well-being.
Equity in classrooms: Allowing unrestricted phone use creates disparities. Some students use devices for entertainment while others cannot afford them, widening engagement gaps. Bans aim to level the playing field.
Parent and teacher support: While some parents worry about emergency contact, many support restrictions once they see improved classroom focus and increased social interaction (The Guardian).
Challenges of Enforcement
Despite widespread support, implementation is not easy.
-
Monitoring compliance is difficult in large schools, with staff needing clear procedures for confiscation or discipline.
-
Exceptions are necessary for medical needs, learning disabilities, or language translation.
-
Emergencies present a challenge, as parents often want students to keep devices nearby in case of crises.
-
District flexibility sometimes creates inconsistent application of laws, with neighboring schools enforcing rules differently.
Looking Ahead: The Future of Phone Bans
The movement shows no sign of slowing down. Several states still considering proposals could pass legislation in 2026 or 2027. Others are revising partial bans into stricter, full-day restrictions as evidence grows of improved student performance.
Florida, for example, is debating whether to extend its policy from instructional time only to a full bell-to-bell prohibition. California districts are preparing for their 2026 deadline by piloting various enforcement methods, including locked pouches and collection bins.
Researchers will continue to study whether these policies have measurable impacts on test scores, mental health, and classroom discipline. Early reports from schools with bans suggest positive changes in student engagement, but long-term data is still being gathered.
Conclusion
By 2025, banning or restricting cell phones in schools has become a national trend.
-
34 states and D.C. now regulate student phone use.
-
18 states and D.C. have full-day bans in place.
-
Others limit phones during classroom instruction or leave policies up to districts.
The overall goal is clear: improve student focus, reduce distractions, and protect mental health. Whether these measures become universal across the U.S. remains to be seen, but the momentum is undeniable. For now, parents, teachers, and lawmakers alike are watching closely as the results unfold in classrooms nationwide.
State-by-State: School Cell-Phone Limits (2025)
| State | Status | Notes (selected nuances) |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Bell-to-bell prohibition with standard exceptions (health, IEP/504, emergencies). |
| Alaska | No Statewide Law | Local districts set rules. |
| Arizona | No Statewide Law | Many district policies; no uniform statewide statute. |
| Arkansas | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | State law restricts use during class; districts handle enforcement details. |
| California | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | State law requires districts to limit/ban smartphones by July 1, 2026; many large districts (e.g., LAUSD) already ban use campus-wide. |
| Colorado | No Statewide Law | District-level discretion; several districts use pouches/collection. |
| Connecticut | No Statewide Law | State guidance; policies common at district/school level. |
| Delaware | No Statewide Law | Districts implement local restrictions. |
| District of Columbia | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Bell-to-bell ban across public schools. |
| Florida | Full-Day Ban (K–8); Instruction-Time (HS) | State pioneered 2023 law; HS use barred in class, tighter bell-to-bell rules K–8; ongoing proposals to tighten further. |
| Georgia | Full-Day Ban (K–8) | Broad K–8 bell-to-bell restrictions; HS limits vary by district beyond class time. |
| Hawaii | No Statewide Law | Generally handled at school/district level. |
| Idaho | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| Illinois | No Statewide Law | Strong local policies, but no single statewide mandate. |
| Indiana | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Bell-to-bell prohibition with standard exceptions. |
| Iowa | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | Classroom use restricted statewide; out-of-class periods may allow limited access per district. |
| Kansas | No Statewide Law | Local discretion. |
| Kentucky | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide bell-to-bell policy. |
| Louisiana | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Comprehensive prohibition during the school day. |
| Maine | No Statewide Law | Local policies predominate. |
| Maryland | No Statewide Law | State guidance; district rules vary. |
| Massachusetts | No Statewide Law | Multiple districts adopting bans; no uniform statute. |
| Michigan | No Statewide Law | Expanding district bans; no statewide law. |
| Minnesota | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | State restriction during class; lunch/passing periods may be permitted. |
| Mississippi | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| Missouri | No Statewide Law | District discretion. |
| Montana | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| Nebraska | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Recently enacted statewide bell-to-bell prohibition. |
| Nevada | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | Classroom use restricted; some district flexibility outside class. |
| New Hampshire | No Statewide Law | Local discretion. |
| New Jersey | No Statewide Law | District-level bans common; no statewide statute. |
| New Mexico | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| New York | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide bell-to-bell ban rolling out in 2025–26; standard exemptions. |
| North Carolina | No Statewide Law | Local control; many district restrictions. |
| North Dakota | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Bell-to-bell prohibition. |
| Ohio | Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) | State limits classroom use; districts may allow during lunch/passing. |
| Oklahoma | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide bell-to-bell ban. |
| Oregon | No Statewide Law | District discretion. |
| Pennsylvania | No Statewide Law | Many districts adopt bans/pouches; no statewide statute. |
| Rhode Island | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| South Carolina | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide bell-to-bell ban; exceptions defined by schools. |
| South Dakota | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| Tennessee | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide bell-to-bell ban. |
| Texas | No Statewide Law | Rapidly expanding district bans; no uniform state mandate. |
| Utah | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Statewide prohibition throughout the day. |
| Vermont | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| Virginia | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | “Bell-to-bell” phone-free classrooms K–12; districts implement logistics. |
| Washington | No Statewide Law | Local control; many district policies. |
| West Virginia | Full-Day Ban (statewide) | Bell-to-bell prohibition. |
| Wisconsin | No Statewide Law | Districts set rules; several moving to bans. |
| Wyoming | No Statewide Law | Local control. |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | Full-Day Ban (territory-wide) | Included for completeness alongside D.C. |
How to read this table
Full-Day Ban (statewide) means phones must be put away for the entire school day (“bell-to-bell”), subject to common exemptions (medical devices/health plans, accessibility/translation needs, IEP/504 accommodations, emergencies).
Instruction-Time Ban (statewide) means classroom use is barred; limited access may be allowed during lunch or passing periods.
State Requires District Policy means a state-level directive requires each district to adopt restrictive policies; the resulting rules often look like instruction-time bans but can vary.
No Statewide Law means policy is left to districts; many still enforce strong campus bans.
Quick context and caveats
AP and EdWeek report that by late summer 2025, 33–34 states plus D.C. restrict student phone use in some form, with roughly 18 states + D.C. enforcing full-day, bell-to-bell bans (AP, EdWeek). California’s statute is a good example of how states are phasing in enforcement—requiring districts to craft and adopt restrictive policies by a defined deadline (Reuters–CA). Specific grade-band carve-outs (e.g., Florida and Georgia’s stronger K–8 rules) and district flexibility mean lived experience can differ across schools within the same state even when a statewide law exists.
