Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
This bill requires each State educational agency to adopt and enforce a policy banning students from possessing or using personal electronic devices, including mobile phones, during school hours in public elementary and secondary schools. It allows secure on-site storage options, lists exceptions (medical needs, IEP/504, some instructional uses, English learners), and directs the Secretary of Education to run a grant program to help states purchase storage and related infrastructure.
Federal mandate versus local control and parental authority
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear substantive-policy proposal that establishes a federal minimum requirement for State educational agencies to prohibit student possession/use of personal electronic devices during school hours, with defined exceptions and a grant program to support secure storage.
This bill requires each State educational agency to adopt and enforce a policy banning students from possessing or using personal electronic devices, including mobile phones, during school hours in public elementary and secondary schools.
It allows secure on-site storage options, lists exceptions (medical needs, IEP/504, some instructional uses, English learners), and directs the Secretary of Education to run a grant program to help states purchase storage and related infrastructure.
The bill defines covered devices and clarifies that authorized school-issued laptops used solely for instruction are excluded.
Reasonable chance as a focused education measure, but federal mandate over state/local schools and unspecified costs reduce prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear substantive-policy proposal that establishes a federal minimum requirement for State educational agencies to prohibit student possession/use of personal electronic devices during school hours, with defined exceptions and a grant program to support secure storage. It provides useful definitional clarity and a near-term deadline but leaves key implementation, funding, accountability, and enforcement details unspecified.
Federal mandate versus local control and parental authority
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Federal mandate versus local control and parental authority
Likely supportive overall because the bill addresses student mental health, classroom focus, and academic outcomes.
Support would be conditional on funding, equitable implementation, and safeguards for vulnerable students; some impacts are uncertain without funding details.
Emphasis on restorative discipline and privacy protections would be expected.
Generally favorable but pragmatic: sees clear classroom benefits and administrative costs.
Support depends on clarity about funding, timelines, enforcement mechanisms, and local control.
Would want measurable pilot data and guidance to avoid unintended consequences.
Mixed to skeptical: may appreciate discipline and reduced distraction, but worries about federal overreach into state education policy and costs.
Concerned about parental rights, local control, and potential administrative burdens.
Support increases if the mandate is voluntary or limited and funding follows requirements.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Reasonable chance as a focused education measure, but federal mandate over state/local schools and unspecified costs reduce prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Federal mandate versus local control and parental authority
Reasonable chance as a focused education measure, but federal mandate over state/local schools and unspecified costs reduce prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear substantive-policy proposal that establishes a federal minimum requirement for State educational agencies to prohibit student possession/use of personal el…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.