When Paige Saumure, a senior at Rio Americano High School in Sacramento, CA, walks into class, the first thing she does is drop her phone into a pouch that hangs on the wall.
Saumure is not alone. Nearly all high school and middle school students in California already have cell phone restrictions in the classroom, and by the beginning of the 2026-2027 school year, cell phone restrictions will be in full effect across the state.
In September 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Phone-Free School Act, which requires all local education agencies (LEAs) to create and implement restrictive cell phone policies by July 2026. Though the deadline still looms ahead, a majority of school districts already have policies regarding personal technology in the classroom. For the dwindling number of LEAs who have not yet restricted access to phones, they have the remainder of the school year to determine their policy.
Saumure’s classroom experience in her senior year is very different compared to her freshman year. In just four years, cell phone restrictions have drastically altered how students learn, act, and engage in their school day. In Saumure’s district, San Juan Unified in Sacramento County, cell phone restrictions have been a policy even before the legislation was passed. However, like many LEAs statewide, the district has since updated and strengthened its policy in response to the new bill.
“When I was a freshman, it was a teacher-by-teacher basis,” Saumure said. “Some teachers had you put it in a backpack or desk, but you could have it on you.” Now, she says that cell phones must go in pouches on the wall. Administrators drop by classrooms to ensure that the phones are properly restricted. “It’s definitely gotten more strict,” Saumure commented. “We can’t even use our own laptops or iPads for notes anymore. No personal devices.”
It is evident that the concerns of school administrators and district leaders extend beyond cell phones and encompass other types of technology. Frequently, policymakers cite concerns about student mental health, cyberbullying, and academic engagement—all stemming from the use of devices in schools.
Melissa Bassanelli, the superintendent of San Juan Unified School District, home to Rio Americano High School, spoke to The Politic about the district’s cell phone policy. “We believe in local control down to the [school] level. And we feel like it’s very important to be empowering sites to implement policies and practices in a way that is responsive to the needs of their communities.”
By giving autonomy to individual school sites, San Juan Unified authorizes administrators and teachers to decide how they would like to restrict cell phones. Strategies can include “bell-to-bell” restrictions for the entire school day, phone bans during class time only, securing phones in magnetic bags, allowing phones in bins or pouches, and other combinations.
The cell phone policy in San Juan Unified was updated in May, and Bassanelli shared her view of how the current school year is progressing with the restrictions. “The things that we’re noticing,” she said, “are fewer meetups in the bathrooms and negative behavior. So whether it’s vaping, bullying, or just hanging out in the bathroom, when [students] should be in class. Those things are being mitigated.”
Notably, Bassanelli pointed out that the district has received few parent complaints. “We have only gotten five complaints from families,” she said. “That’s pretty significant when you think of the 40,000 students in San Juan. Only five complaints.”
Nevertheless, despite the potential progress in her district, the superintendent is still concerned about the effect of phones on hindering student communication. “The whole social emotional development of our young people is completely different from what it was when I was in school,” she added.
Her comments regarding communication, connection, and social development are supported by research. Doctor Kathy Do, an Assistant Project Scientist with the University of California and California State University Collaborative for Neuroscience, Diversity, and Learning, spoke about the research behind the restrictions.
“A lot of the motivation for these policies comes from the research that shows the links between social media use and rising anxiety and depression rates among young people, especially for girls,” Dr. Do said. “That data has been circulating for years now, and it’s hard to ignore.”
Indeed, the data that links adolescent digital access to high rates of depression and anxiety is a concern for policymakers and educators alike. Additionally, as Superintendent Bassanelli had noted, there are concerns that technology facilitates bad habits.
Doctor Do acknowledged the role technology can play in increasing troubling behaviors. She said, “There’s research about online bullying, about access to drugs through apps like Snapchat, and parents are really concerned about these things. So the policy conversation is about academics, but also about protecting kids from those risks.”
The new absence of cell phones from the classroom is also affecting student behavior linked to their ability to focus. In her high school, Saumure notices that her peers are finding new methods to occupy themselves. “When they take phones away, people just doodle, or color, or fidget with something else,” she said. “It’s just another outlet; people always find something.”
Doctor Do found Saumure’s observation about students fidgeting and searching for something else to occupy either their hands or minds consistent with the research. “Young people use their phones for lots of different reasons,” she commented. “They might use their phones for emotional regulation or stress.”
She notes that observing student behaviors under cell phone restrictions is important in determining underlying problems, such as adverse mental health effects. “These behaviors might be a signal of needing more mental health support or social support when they are in a stressful situation. It’s important to pay attention to whether those kinds of alternative behaviors in the absence of phones might be signs of needing more support.”
Carlos Vazquez, a senior at San Marcos High School, is the Student Board Member for Santa Barbara Unified School District. His school district has been commended by Governor Newsom for implementing an “Off and Away” cell phone policy since 2022.
Vazquez has always attended high school under restrictive cell phone policies. “At first, everyone complained a lot,” Vazquez recalled. “But now it’s normal, people automatically put their phones away when they walk in. It’s kind of muscle memory.”
He believes the restrictions are mostly positive. “Overall, I support the restrictions on phones, and I think a lot of students that I’ve spoken to do as well,” he commented. “It’s a distraction. It’s a lot easier to be focused in class.”
However, Vazquez notes that cell phone restrictions should not be the sole solution to address student well-being concerns. He is an advocate for mental health supports, and he believes that more needs to be done to address phone addictions.
“I think it’s important to have cell phone policies in place,” he said. “Just in the meantime, until those deeper issues are further [addressed].”
Other students oppose restrictions entirely. Rishal Melvani, a senior at Monte Vista High School, is the founder of End Phone Bans, a national movement that launched on October 1, 2025. The site includes a manifesto detailing their stance, a survey to collect student opinion, and a pledge that students can sign to protest cell phone restrictions.
He acknowledged the negative effects of phones, but continues to advocate for student agency. “The same kids who are addicted are still addicted,” Melvani argued. “But actually knowing that you are addressing your addiction for your own benefit is so much better than it being a mandate.”
“The best type of learning happens when students have purpose in their own learning,” he commented. By stripping students of their phones, Melvani believes that students lose autonomy, which negatively affects their experience in the classroom.
“There’s no policy in the United States that 80% or 90% of Americans disagree with,” Melvani said. “So I don’t think that there should be a policy in schools that 89% of students disagree with.”
The statistic that 89% of students disagree with cell phone policies comes from the End Phone Bans national survey. Collecting student data is a major goal for Melvani, as he believes that the student perspective is lacking in policy discussions about cell phones in schools.
Mary Nicely, the Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Information and Technology branch at the California Department of Education, agreed that student voice is pivotal. She is an advocate for restrictive policies, though she agrees with Melvani that student participation in policy is crucial for the implementation of successful cell phone policies.
“It’s not just about test scores or GPAs,” she said, “We’re also seeing phones contribute to anxiety, bullying, constant social pressure, all of which spill over into classrooms. We want students to be heard in this process. They’re the ones living it every day. If they don’t feel heard, the policy is going to feel like punishment instead of support.”
Nicely emphasized how the legislation gives LEAs and school districts plenty of autonomy to create cell phone restrictions that best fit their needs. This autonomy also provides them the opportunity to gather feedback from students, educators, families, and community members to formulate optimal solutions.
“The law is statewide, but deliberately gives districts room because a one-size-fits-all approach would not be effective,” Nicely said. “What works in Los Angeles might not work in a small rural school district, and vice versa.”
Vanessa Ejike, a senior at Gretchen Whitney High School in Cerritos, CA, feels that her high school is very flexible when it comes to cell phone policies. Ejike is a Student Board Member for the California State Board of Education. She was appointed by Governor Newsom in April, and she is currently representing the approximately six million students in the state of California for a one-year term.
“I have some lenient teachers and I have some strict teachers,” she said. She believes that allowing teachers to decide how they will restrict cell phones in their classrooms is a positive thing for the classroom environment. “Having teachers set their own restrictions regarding cell phone usage is how we can really make the policy more equitable and more beneficial for all students. I think leaving it in the hands of teachers benefits the mutual respect, trust, and support between teachers and students.”
Ejike wonders if student voice is adequately included in the creation of local cell phone policies. “One of my worries is that students aren’t the foremost stakeholders,” she said. “I really hope that students aren’t afraid of voicing their own feelings regarding the cell phone restriction rather than what they think the adults in the room might want to hear.”
She encourages students to get involved with their school district or LEA as statewide discussions unfold about adolescents and their devices. Ejike believes that stakeholder engagement will ensure the policies have more success and address the needs of students.
Ejike’s fellow member on the California State Board of Education, Dr. Alison Yoshimoto-Towery, is in favor of cell phone restrictions. Yoshimoto-Towery’s perspective as a board member and executive director of the University of California and California State University Collaborative for Neuroscience, Diversity, and Learning informs her view on cell phone restrictions and the tools necessary for student success.
“Removing the phones from classrooms is one thing,” she noted. “But it would be nice if we could pair that with what the research says about the dangers of social media addiction, or how to help students find social connection in healthy ways. Or how students could use A.I., for example, to improve their academic performance.”
Yoshimoto-Towery, who is also the former Chief Academic Officer for Los Angeles Unified School District, mentioned the need for broader systems of support for the California youth regarding cell phones.
“I would always suggest professional development for educators,” she said. “And family engagement. The use of cell phones starts way before students come to school these days.”
As Yoshimoto-Towery emphasized, professional development and teacher support are crucial for the success of cell phone policies. Haydee Rodriguez, a National Board Certified teacher and fellow member of the California State Board of Education, believes that teachers must be included in the creation of technology policies.
“Professional development is really key here,” Rodriguez said. “Making sure that teachers feel prepared, that they have strategies for what to do when students resist, or when students are struggling with their phones.”
Rodriguez told The Politic about her journalism class at Union Central High School, which requires the use of phones. “We use cell phones as a tool,” she described. “Students can record interviews, they’re able to take notes, they’re able to use it to capture things that they then write about.”
Instances like Rodriguez’s class illuminate the value of cell phones as learning tools. They can be a critical resource for student creativity and learning, but also severe distractions in class. As Rodriquez said, “It must be a balance.”
This balance is one that students, teachers, administrators, and policymakers must navigate carefully in the coming years. As Californians look ahead to the future of the classroom and its dynamics, the successful implementation of phone restrictions will look different to various stakeholder groups.
But success—or lack thereof—will perhaps be most visible and impactful for the students of the state of California. For seniors like Saumure, Vazquez, and Ejike, their final year in high school will be characterized by the strictest cell phone policies yet, and students entering high and middle schools statewide will learn under the restrictive technology policies for their entire academic career.
What do the students of California foresee will change as cell phone restrictions are increasingly implemented? None of the students are confident in their answers.
At Rio Americano High School, Saumure wonders if restrictions will be helpful or harmful. “I do see there being more socializing,” she said about the future. “I do see there being a little more focus in the classroom.”
This hope for more community and engagement in school is shared by students, educators, and policymakers. Under the restrictions, students will have more ability to engage with each other and their learning material.
But Saumure and her peers are not entirely convinced. “However, I also see even more addiction outside of the classroom,” she added, echoing the concern about the lack of self-regulation skills that resonates with youth and adults alike.
Saumure is not alone in her hopes and worries. Each morning, when Saumure and her peers across the state put away their phones to focus on class, they are taking part in an experiment—an attempt to redefine how students engage academically and socially. No one is quite sure what success will look like, or how the restrictions will change the classroom dynamics for students and teachers.
What is certain is that personal technology and its effects on youth are a challenge that no single policy can solve, and it demands broader support outside of the classroom.
For now, policymakers and statewide leaders in education policy hope that cell phone restrictions are a first step towards finding how technology can serve the learning environment, not disrupt it.