Schools to Enforce Cell Phone Restrictions

Tennessee lawmakers have approved a statewide crackdown on student cell phone use in classrooms. House Bill 932 and Senate Bill 897 require every public school district to adopt policies banning personal wireless devices during instructional time. The measure, which passed with broad bipartisan support—80-9 in the House and 30-0 in the Senate—now awaits Governor Bill Lee’s signature. If signed, the law takes effect on July 1, 2025, in time for the 2025-26 school year.

What the Law Requires
The law requires all local education agencies (LEAs) and public charter schools to establish and enforce restrictions on student phone use. Schools must:

• Ban student cell phone use during class, with exceptions for teacher-approved learning, emergencies, and students with disabilities (IEPs or 504 plans).

• Publish policies online so parents and students have clear expectations.

• Develop emergency communication plans to ensure parents receive timely updates without relying on student devices.

• Authorize teachers to confiscate phones when students violate the policy.

Rep. Rebecca Alexander (R-Jonesborough), the bill’s House sponsor, defended the measure: “Every school district should want to do this if they want what’s best for their students. We’ve seen clear evidence that cell phones are harming students’ focus and increasing distractions.”

Sen. Ferrell Haile (R-Gallatin), the Senate sponsor, called it a step toward safer, more focused learning environments: “This is about minimizing classroom distractions and reducing social media-driven bullying.”

A Shift in Tennessee’s School Policy
Tennessee has wrestled with school cell phone policies for years. The State Board of Education once had a statewide ban on “two-way communication devices,” but it was repealed in 2017, leaving decisions up to local districts. Many districts implemented their own restrictions, but state lawmakers now say a uniform policy is needed.

House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-Crossville) pointed to concerns over student mental health: “There is a direct correlation between increased cell phone use and rising rates of suicide, bullying, and anxiety in teenagers. Keeping these devices out of the classroom is beneficial.”

Other states, including Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana, have passed similar laws, arguing that phone-free classrooms improve academic performance and student well-being.

Concerns and Pushback
While widely supported, the bill has faced some skepticism. Rep. Gloria Johnson (D-Knoxville) questioned whether a statewide mandate was necessary: “Most schools already have policies in place. This feels redundant.”

Others raised concerns about parent-child communication during emergencies. However, the bill mandates that schools implement emergency notification systems so parents are informed through official channels rather than relying on student phones.

The bill also sparked a local control debate. Some lawmakers felt school boards, not the state, should make these decisions. Sen. Adam Lowe (R-Calhoun) said: “I would have preferred the State Board of Education or the Department of Education to take the lead in creating a policy, but I support the intent of the legislation.”

Student advocacy groups and parents have also voiced concerns. Tennessee Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) representatives warned that strict phone bans may disproportionately affect students who rely on their devices for translation, organization, or mental health support. “For some students, a phone is more than just a distraction—it’s a lifeline for accessibility and communication,” said a PTA spokesperson.

Special Education and Accessibility Concerns
Special education advocates have raised concerns regarding enforcement. The Tennessee Disability Coalition noted that some students with autism or ADHD rely on assistive apps and communication tools on their phones to manage anxiety, follow schedules, and complete tasks. “Banning phones outright could disrupt vital coping mechanisms for students with disabilities,” said a coalition spokesperson. The law provides exceptions for IEP and 504 accommodations, but enforcement could vary by school.

What Are IEPs and 504 Plans?
IEPs (Individualized Education Programs) and 504 Plans are legally binding documents under federal law that ensure students with disabilities receive necessary accommodations. IEPs, governed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), provide specialized instruction, while 504 Plans (under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973) ensure equal access through accommodations.

For some students, accommodations include assistive technology, speech-to-text apps, or communication devices accessed through phones. Disability advocates argue that while the law allows exceptions for students with IEPs and 504 Plans, schools must properly implement these exemptions to avoid penalizing students who need these tools.

Intersection of Special Education and DEI Initiatives
Some school districts have incorporated IEP and 504 accommodations into Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, focusing on expanding accessibility beyond students with diagnosed disabilities. One approach, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), promotes adaptable teaching strategies to accommodate a wider range of learning needs, including those who do not qualify for formal accommodations but may still face educational challenges.

Supporters of this approach argue that it broadens access to educational support for students who might otherwise struggle but do not meet eligibility criteria for IEPs or 504 Plans. They contend that universal accessibility measures ensure a more flexible learning environment and reduce the need for complex evaluation processes.

Critics argue that broadening eligibility could divert resources from students with legally recognized disabilities, whose accommodations are mandated by federal law. They express concerns that integrating special education into broader DEI efforts may weaken individualized support for students who require specialized interventions.

Additionally, some DEI-driven policies advocate for alternative disciplinary approaches for students with disabilities, emphasizing restorative justice over punitive measures. Proponents believe this approach reduces disproportionate disciplinary actions against neurodivergent students, while others question whether it leads to inconsistencies in enforcement and affects classroom management.

Impact of DEI Dismantling on IEP and 504 Plans
Federal actions have dismantled DEI programs, including the elimination of DEI-related funding and training within the U.S. Department of Education. However, IEPs and 504 Plans remain protected under existing federal law. Concerns remain about whether broader education funding changes could indirectly impact special education resources. Legal challenges have been filed in some states regarding the rollback of DEI, but there is no current legislative action targeting IEPs or 504 Plans for removal.

Key Distinction
While DEI programs are being dismantled at the federal level, IEPs and 504 Plans remain legally separate from DEI and continue to be protected by federal law. Some concerns exist about indirect funding effects, but there is no active policy or legislation eliminating these disability protections. Schools remain obligated to provide accommodations as required by IDEA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

Next Steps: Implementation and Oversight
If signed by Governor Bill Lee, the law takes effect July 1, 2025. Schools will have a year to update policies, revise student handbooks, and train staff on enforcement.

At this point, the Tennessee Department of Education has not issued a model policy, meaning districts will have flexibility in shaping their rules. However, failure to adopt a policy could prompt State Board of Education intervention.

Lawmakers argue the move will curb distractions, reduce social media-fueled bullying, and refocus students on learning. However, enforcement will determine its real impact. The coming months will reveal how Tennessee schools handle the shift.

Sources:
• Tennessee General Assembly, HB 932 / SB 897 – Official bill text and legislative summaries: https://www.capitol.tn.gov

• Tennessee Department of Education – State Board Policy 2.301 (Historical Reference): https://www.tn.gov/education

• National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD) – Policy recommendations: https://www.ncld.org

• Disability Rights Tennessee – Position on education access: https://www.disabilityrightstn.org

• U.S. Department of Education – Legal protections under IDEA and Section 504: https://www.ed.gov

• Tennessee Disability Coalition – Special education advocacy: https://www.tndisability.org