Estimated Time to Read: 9 minutes
Texas has officially entered the national movement to restrict student cell phone use during the school day. With House Bill 1481 (HB 1481) now law, passed earlier this year as a part of the 89th Legislative Session, every Texas public school district and open enrollment charter school must adopt a policy prohibiting students from using personal communication devices anywhere on school property.
This mandate has been celebrated by some policymakers and by organizations like the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), which published a paper highlighting the negative educational and psychological effects associated with smartphones, but there is a deeper question at stake. Did Texas need a statewide prohibition, or are we mistaking a parenting problem for a technology problem?
A new National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) study analyzing Florida’s statewide ban reveals a complex mixture of outcomes. The evidence shows benefits in certain contexts, yet also serious drawbacks and a reality that cannot be ignored. Rules about how children use technology are fundamentally parenting decisions. HB 1481 shifts that responsibility to the state and treats every child, every family, every campus, and every circumstance the same.
The core issue is not the phone. It is the responsibility of parents to guide their children. When the state steps in with blanket mandates, it does not strengthen parenting. It replaces it.
What the National Movement Gets Right and What It Misses
Across the country, states are adopting or considering school day phone bans. Supporters argue that phones distract from learning, increase anxiety, and fuel cyberbullying. The TPPF policy paper cites research showing that students who check their phones perform worse on competency tests, that personal devices reduce attention, and that harmful behavior has occurred in several Texas districts.
There is truth in these concerns. Phones can distract. Digital cruelty is real. Some students struggle with overuse. But these concerns do not automatically justify state intervention. Many of the studies cited are correlational and cannot establish causation. Even the research that is stronger does not answer the most important question. Who should decide how a child uses technology: the state or the parent?
The movement toward bans often assumes that government can solve problems that originate in family culture and expectations, but the responsibility to teach discipline, boundaries, and appropriate habits does not belong to the state. It belongs first to parents.
Florida’s Evidence and Parental Decisions
Florida implemented the first statewide cellphone ban in 2023. The NBER study provides the strongest causal evidence to date on how such bans affect students. The results reveal a two-part story.
During the first year, disciplinary incidents and suspensions skyrocketed. Suspension rates more than doubled after enforcement began and stayed roughly 25% higher than the previous year. Middle and high school students saw the sharpest spike, and Black students experienced the largest increase in in-school suspensions. Elementary students were affected far less, and some campuses saw improvements only in the second year.
Academic gains did not appear immediately. Test scores remained flat in year one and improved modestly only in year two, mainly in middle and high schools. These gains were linked largely to reduced unexcused absences. Absenteeism fell between 5% and 10% of the comparison mean and accounted for nearly half of the later test score improvements.
This evidence matters. It confirms that device restrictions can improve outcomes for some students in some settings, but it also shows that blanket mandates lead to serious disruptions and that benefits appear only after significant parental and student adjustments. The lesson is not that bans never work. The lesson is that results depend entirely on context, age group, culture, and how families manage their children’s behavior.
Which is precisely why these decisions should remain with parents and teachers, not the state.
What HB 1481 Actually Does and Why It Oversteps
HB 1481 amends Section 37.082 of the Texas Education Code to require every public school district and charter school to adopt a written policy prohibiting students from using personal communication devices anywhere on campus during the school day. Districts may require secure storage or prohibit devices entirely. Schools may confiscate devices and dispose of them after 90 days written notice to parents.
The most important fact is this. Texas school districts already had full legal authority to prohibit phones. Local school boards did not need authorization from Austin. Teachers already had the authority to ban phones in their own classrooms. Parents already had the authority to set expectations for their children. HB 1481 did not empower schools. It displaced the authority that naturally belongs to parents and teachers.
This is not ultimately a question of whether phones distract. It is a question of whether the state should assume responsibility for parenting decisions.
The Real Issue is Parenting, Not Policy Gaps
Supporters of statewide bans often point to research showing that personal devices can distract students, contribute to anxiety, and sometimes facilitate harmful behavior among peers. These concerns are valid and deserve attention, but the conclusion that the state must impose a universal mandate does not follow from the evidence. Many of the studies commonly cited identify correlations rather than causation, and even the strongest research, including the recent causal study from Florida, shows that the effects of bans vary widely depending on age group, school climate, and family engagement.
The deeper issue is not the presence of phones. It is the absence of consistent parental guidance. When families set and enforce clear expectations for their children, teach responsible technology use, and stay involved in their social and academic lives, phones do not dominate the school day. When that parental involvement breaks down, the instinct is often to call for government intervention. That instinct treats a cultural and family problem as if it were a policy gap.
A statewide prohibition replaces the role of the parent rather than reinforcing it. Decisions about how and when a child may use a phone are fundamentally parenting decisions. Families differ in their needs and values. Some choose to delay access to devices until adolescence. Others rely on phones for medical monitoring, transportation coordination, or communication after school. Still others want their children to learn responsible use rather than simply comply with a prohibition.
A single statewide rule cannot reflect these distinctions. The problem is not that schools lack the authority to restrict devices. Districts already had complete discretion to adopt phone-free policies, and many did so on their own. Teachers already had the authority to manage devices in their classrooms. The real problem is the growing expectation that statewide mandates should replace personal and parental responsibility.
Strong parenting, not top-down decrees, is the most effective solution.
Why the Core Liberty Objection is About Parental Responsibility
Texas Policy Research (TPR) evaluates legislation based on liberty principles. Although local autonomy remains relevant, the most pressing objection to HB 1481 concerns parental authority and responsibility.
Parents Should Make Technology Decisions for Their Children
Phone habits are not the same for every child. As noted above, some families rely on phones for medical monitoring or transportation coordination, and others want to restrict them until adolescence. Still others want to teach responsible use. HB 1481 denies all of these choices by imposing a single, centralized rule.
The State Cannot Parent the Child
When the state dictates technology boundaries, children learn obedience to the government rather than responsibility to the family. That undermines the development of disciplined habits and sends a message that personal restraint is something the state must enforce rather than something families cultivate.
Teacher Discretion Should Complement Parental Judgment
Teachers already controlled whether phones could be used in their classrooms. Parent and teacher partnership is the natural place for these decisions. HB 1481 drops a blanket rule on every school, regardless of context.
Private Property Rights Matter
The law allows schools to confiscate and dispose of a student’s privately owned device after notice. For many families, this property is significant. This provision replaces parental authority with state authority over a child’s own belongings.
The Problem Is Not the Phone
Phones cannot distract without a user. The real issue is the cultural decline in parental engagement and a growing dependency on government to address issues that should be addressed at home. Parents should teach children how to use technology wisely, not outsource that responsibility to politicians.
Empowering Parents and Teachers, Not Politicians and Bureaucrats
Supporters of the ban often say that no school that has gone phone-free regrets the decision, but even if administrators are satisfied, what matters most is whether parents and teachers support the loss of discretion. A statewide mandate replaces individual judgment with political command.
HB 1481 denies parents the flexibility to set rules that match their child’s needs. It denies teachers the ability to craft classroom expectations that reflect their instructional style. It denies communities the right to set different norms based on their values and challenges.
Instead of bans, Texas should promote education about digital risks, support parents in building healthier habits at home, and ensure teachers have the authority to create disciplined classrooms. School choice should allow families to choose schools aligned with their preferences. The state should offer guidance and information, not edicts.
Government should empower families, not replace them.
Parental Responsibility Is the Better Path
Texas now has a statewide cell phone ban, but the strongest available evidence from Florida makes clear that these policies have mixed outcomes. They reduce distractions in some contexts but cause disruption in others. They improve attendance for some students but raise equity concerns for others.
Most importantly, they shift responsibility away from families. HB 1481 does not solve the underlying problem. It responds to the symptoms of weak parenting with regulation rather than reinforcing the vital role of parents and teachers.
Texas has long valued liberty, family authority, and responsibility. Those values point to a different conclusion. Texans do not need a blanket mandate to govern how children use technology. Families and educators should set those boundaries themselves.
Banning cell phones statewide is not the answer. Stronger parenting, stronger responsibility, and stronger family-school partnerships are.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
