North Carolina House bill introduced to ban cellphones in class
A bill was introduced to the North Carolina House of Representatives this week.
Two of the primary co-sponsors of the bill are Representative Brian Biggs, who represents Randolph County, and Representative Neal Jackson, who represents Moore County and a portion of Randolph County.
If the House bill were to successfully pass, each school district across the state would have to have a cellphone-free policy.
'Kids don't need to be playing on their Internet … There's cheating opportunities, a whole lot of disadvantages when kids are playing on phones during class times,' Jackson said.
House Bill 87 Cell Phone-Free Education would restrict students from using cellphones in class and in other academic periods.
If passed, it would be up to each school district to determine how they want the policy enforced.
'We're giving them back the authority to work out the specifics and the details. So are they going to put them in magnetic pouches or are they going to have all of them placed in a pouch when the kids come in? Or is it going to be totally like Chatham County? Kids put it in the pouch at the beginning of the school day,' Jackson said.
Representative Tracy Clark, who represents Guilford County, is one of several legislators in support of the bill.
'As a parent of two children in our school system in Guilford County, we all know that phones are a distraction … We need to minimize distractions in order to increase learning and to support our teachers so that they can be effective in the classroom,' Clark said.
There's another version of this bill. Senate Bill 55 was filed in the North Carolina Senate and is titled Student Use of Wireless Communication Devices. It would address student use of different devices other than phones like laptops, tablets and two-way radios.
'Every minute that our children are in school needs to be directed as much as possible toward actual learning and actual instruction … We still have significant gaps that need to be made up in math, education and reading,' said Senator Amy Galey (R), NC Senate District 25.
If the House passes its version and the Senate passes its version, state leaders will go to a conference and try to work out the details of the policy banning cellphones in classrooms.
If the bills pass in the current session of the North Carolina General Assembly, they will go into effect next school year.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
18 minutes ago
- NBC News
What's next in the battle over redistricting as the Texas House passes new GOP maps
The Republican-controlled state House in Texas has passed new congressional maps that aim to pad the party's majority in Washington by as much as five seats in the midterm elections, a move that comes as battles over redistricting spread across the country. With Texas set to fully enact its new plan as soon as this week, urged on by President Donald Trump, California Democrats are moving quickly to implement a plan carving up their state's maps in retaliation. Meanwhile, top Republicans in states like Indiana, Missouri and Florida continue to talk about tweaking their maps to create more Republican-controlled congressional seats in the 2026 elections. Ohio's redraw, which it must do under state law, could benefit the GOP, too. Governors in Democratic-controlled states are weighing a response too, but in many cases, they're restrained by procedural hurdles or by other practical limitations — some have already stretched their own gerrymandered maps as far as they could go — that could make a tit-for-tat more difficult. It's all expected to come to a head in a matter of weeks, against the backdrop of a race for the congressional majority in Washington that sits on a knife's edge. The final outcome in Texas Lawmakers in the GOP-controlled Texas House passed their map Wednesday, days after Democrats returned from a two-week "quorum break" in which they fled the state to hold up the bill. But they could only delay, not derail, the new Republican maps, which convert three deep-blue districts into deep-red ones and tilt two Democratic-held South Texas districts slightly further toward the GOP, too. State Rep. Todd Hunter, a Republican who represents Corpus Christi and co-sponsored the new map, kicked off the day with some straight talk. 'The underlying goal is this plan is straightforward: Improve Republican political performance,' he told his colleagues, adding that the crux of the changes to the maps center on five districts that 'now trend Republican in political performance.' 'While there's no guarantee of an electorate success, Republicans will now have an opportunity to potentially win those districts,' he added. After a handful of lawmakers remained in the chamber overnight to protest House leadership for requiring Democrats agree to police escorts to ensure they don't attempt to skip town again, Democrats took to the floor to criticize their Republican colleagues over the maps. They questioned whether their Republican colleagues were truly not factoring in the racial compositions of districts, as they claimed, warning Democrats will have "their day in federal court." They also hit out at their scheduling in the special legislative session, which put redistricting on the calendar ahead of voting on relief for the victims of the July floods in the Hill Country. 'This is Donald Trump's map. It clearly and deliberately manufactures five more Republican seats in Congress because Trump himself knows the voters are rejecting his agenda and instead of respecting that rejection, he's changing the rules," said state Rep. John Bucy III of Austin, a Democrat. "Instead of listening to the people he's trying to silence them, and Texas Republicans have been more than willing to help.' California Democrats move to retaliate California's legislature saw an hours-long hearing Tuesday as Democrats there speed toward passing legislation that will call for a fall special election putting redistricting on the ballot. Voters will decide whether to override the state's independent redistricting commission and approve temporary, Democratic-drawn maps for the rest of the decade. Those maps are the political inverse of the ones in Texas — endangering a handful of incumbent Republicans and putting Democrats in position to net up to five seats from California's new map, according to estimates from the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. The hearing turned contentious amid interruptions and partisan clashes between lawmakers. Republicans repeatedly accused Democrats of wasting state resources — a statewide special election would cost significant funds — and for bucking the agreement that empowered the state's independent redistricting panel in the first place. 'California should lead the way — when other states decide to do something else, we shouldn't react to them, we should prove by example that we can do this better. That we create the foundations for the rest of the nation,' said state Assemblyman David Tangipa, a Republican from the Fresno area, said. Steve Bennett, a Democratic state legislator from Ventura, lashed out at Texas Republicans' mid-decade redistricting by comparing it to power grabs by 'autocrats' like Russian President Vladimir Putin. "We prefer the agreement we all had to play by the old rules," he said. "But when autocrats change the rules and the norms that we are using to decide who has power, we can either fight back or we can potentially permanently lose the ability ever to fight back again." Democrats need to get the maps passed through the legislature soon in order to bring the question to the voters this fall, if they want to enact the maps in time for the 2026 midterms. Republicans are seeking to delay that, with a group of lawmakers suing this week, arguing that Democrats haven't given the public the required time to review legislation before voting. Other states weigh jumping into the fray While the spotlight remains on California and Texas, redistricting remains a live ball in other states. Ohio must redraw its lines by law, since the state legislature approved its 2021 map without Democratic support. The timing could work out well for Republicans, who control the legislature there and could stand to gain depending on how the maps are drawn. Two of Ohio's three Democratic House members won re-election last cycle by less than 3 percentage points. In Indiana, the state's Republican members of Congress have in recent days announced their support for a redraw there, where the party already controls seven of the nine congressional seats. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, a Republican, hasn't said whether he plans to call for a special session of the legislature. But Vice President JD Vance traveled to Indiana earlier this month to meet with the governor as the redistricting debate swirled. In Missouri, Republicans have been cajoling Gov. Mike Kehoe to call a special legislative session for redistricting there, where the GOP controls six of the eight congressional seats. In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said this week that people can 'anticipate' a mid-decade redraw because there has been a 'sea change in demography' since the 2020 census. Outside of California, where their efforts are subject to approval from voters, Democrats face a smattering of other challenges if they want to redraw maps in other states. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who has been vocally supportive of the Texas House Democrats' attempts to delay the redistricting process in their home state, hasn't ruled out a redistricting push in his backyard. But Democrats already hold 14 of the state's 17 congressional districts there. New York Democrats are also interested in redrawing the lines there, but they face logistical hurdles to change the state constitution, which would likely mean no changes until 2028 at the earliest.
Axios
41 minutes ago
- Axios
Texas House approves redistricting map favoring Republicans
The Texas House gave initial approval to a new congressional map Wednesday that will likely give Republicans five more seats in a closely divided U.S. House. Why it matters: The redistricting would go a long way to ensuring the U.S. House remains in Republican control — even as it sets in motion a wave of gerrymandering in other states. Catch up quick: Heavily outnumbered Texas House Democrats briefly held up the redistricting plan as they left for other states, depriving the chamber of the quorum necessary for a vote. But they returned Monday for a new special session, saying they would now challenge the redistricting in the courts. By the numbers: The 38-member Texas congressional delegation is currently composed of 12 Democrats and 25 Republicans. One seat is vacant, following the death earlier this year of Democratic Rep. Sylvester Turner of Houston. Under the new map, prompted by a demand from President Trump, Texas would likely send 30 Republicans and eight Democrats to Washington. What they're saying: "You want transparency? ... The underlying goal of this redistricting is to improve Republican political performance," bill author state Rep. Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi) said on Wednesday. The other side: The proposal amounts to "an illegal and racially discriminatory map" that "surgically ... strips away minority representation in the U.S. Congress," state Rep. Chris Turner (D-Grand Prairie) said. "This is Texas, not Washington, D.C. The impulses of outside politicians and their billionaire backers shouldn't dictate what we do in this House," he said.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump's DC takeover is just Step 1 — dysfunctional capital needs a bigger fix
Last week President Donald Trump declared war on crime in Washington, DC, when he sent in the National Guard and federalized the district's police force for the 30-day period allowable under the DC Home Rule Act. Trump's motives were good: He's right that it's shameful our national capital has become one of our most dangerous cities. He's also right that DC's crime epidemic hurts America's competitiveness and prestige. But the president's month-long law enforcement takeover won't fix that problem — because the problem is not, at its core, bad law enforcement. It's the fact that DC's government has for decades now shown itself incapable of even the most basic level of public administration. Blame it, too, on Congress, which transferred control over the district to the city's own elected government in the Home Rule Act of 1973 — but has refused to admit its mistake and reverse course. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives remain aloof from the problems they created, even as federal staffers, visitors and on occasion their own members are routinely harassed and attacked by criminals on the streets and in their homes. But the US Constitution stipulates that DC is a national public resource, not a self-governing city like any other. Under the Constitution, it is Congress's responsibility to competently administrate it — and Congress has abdicated that responsibility. When the 30-day takeover period is up (assuming Congress does not renew his privileges), Trump will turn the keys back over to a capital city government that can't staff a police force, can't keep young violent offenders off the streets and can't run a functioning crime lab. District officials can't claim to have reduced crime without cooking the books, and can't protect visiting diplomats from being shot And they're not just failing at law enforcement: DC can't keep its public schools out of the basement of national performance rankings, and can't prevent huge homeless encampments from forming while thousands of district-owned public housing units go unoccupied. The only possible solution to such a crisis of mismanagement is to overturn the law that gave home rule to DC and start over from scratch. And if President Trump is serious about tackling the district's dysfunction, he should do just that. First, the president should build up some goodwill by ending his police federalization and troop occupation, preferably earlier than planned. No need to make excuses; he can simply explain that he's come to realize DC's dysfunction runs far deeper than anything a few extra officers on the streets can solve. Then he and Republican leadership should begin meeting with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to generate support for Home Rule repeal. While Trump seems to think the entire district is dead set against him, this is incorrect: Many residents, while no fans of the president, are fed up with not being able to safely walk their dogs at night. Longtime Democratic members of Congress have personally experienced the city's dangers for many years, and they all know the ordeal of their colleague Angie Craig (D-Minn.), who was assaulted in her apartment building's elevator just two years ago. If Trump were to approach this issue firmly but collaboratively, he would find the water warmer than he thinks. Legally, the argument is not a hard sell. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress shall have 'exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever' over the federal district. Congress has given a 50-year trial to the notion of delegating its power to the people of DC, and that trial has unequivocally failed to produce a district that serves the interests of the federal government, the American people, or the residents themselves. Therefore, we should return to rule by Congress, as the Constitution mandates. Doing so would require a simple act of Congress, passed by both parties, that overturns the 1973 law and dismisses DC's elected representatives. A third section of the new law should establish a congressional committee to appoint exemplary city managers from cities around United States to reconstitute a competent DC government. In many American cities, like Madison, Wis., Phoenix, Ariz., and Wichita, Kan., elected officials appoint professional administrators to oversee day-to-day municipal operations. Washington, DC, should do the same — with Congress taking ultimate responsibility. Some on the left will bemoan the reversal of Home Rule as yet another federal assault on our democracy. But the District of Columbia was never intended by the Founders to be a self-governing state. It was intended to serve the interests of the country as a whole, by providing a safe and orderly place for public administration. Returning DC's governing prerogative to the people of America, not the district itself, will take us one step closer to being the republic the Founders envisioned. John Masko is a journalist specializing in business and international politics.
