Among the top five “takeaways” from Gov. Janet Mills’ needlessly sassy State of the State speech was a proposal for a statewide ban on cellphones in schools.

“When cellphones are removed from classrooms, research shows that student performance
improves, test scores improve, behavior improves, attendance improves and social dynamics
improve,” the governor said.

We hardly need research to bear this out for us. Do we?

This editorial board has been a vocal supporter of a ban on phones at school. Almost two years ago, while praising a then-emerging trend among individual schools and school districts, we noted that it was “simply no match for a firm tack taken and insisted on at the state level.

“The fight against the algorithm and the social media notifications is, on its face, not a fair fight,” we wrote. “Resisting the addictive nature of these platforms will require a muscular, careful and, importantly, unified response.”

A year later, we responded to the effective failure of a bill before the Legislature that would have secured that response for Maine.

“The resistance of local school districts, squeamish about overreach, led to the original bill being watered down to a far less effective and less responsible version of its former self,” we wrote. “Now, providing it passes, school districts will only be asked to provide a ‘comprehensive policy around cellphones in schools by August 2026,’ which need not extend to a ban.”

A statement from the Maine School Management Association at that time — “Imposing this mandate will not allow for community collaboration to tackle this challenge.” —  seems even sillier and more evasive today.

Is this an arcane challenge? Or is it a simple rule? It’s a simple rule, the “bell to bell” ban, one that’s in effect in 23 states already.

Introducing the proposal, Gov. Mills acknowledged that it may not be a hit with all students. In Portland, however, where the district has implemented the ban, reporting by this publication found that students who originally opposed it came around to the policy in no time at all.

Student grumbling, however, could be the least of Mills’ concerns.

Since the State of the State, outspoken Republican Rep. Laurel Libby has asked her social media followers not once, not twice, but three times what they make of the proposal to ban phones. Here’s a flavor of what this bit of gentle rabble-rousing attracted.

“Put close captioned cameras in all classrooms accessible only to the parents of the students then i am okay with no cellphones in class.”

“Used to think YES! after seeing the indoctrination, NO! … unless they’re willing to put cameras in every classroom (with microphones). Parents have a right to know.”

“Good idea, IF, we mandate spy cameras and mics in every classroom in the state. And I mean spy cameras. By and large, the public schools in the state have proven they can’t be trusted.”

“There is more knowledge in the phone than will ever come from a Maine school.”

What’s this? A newly minted “partisan issue”? A new and unfortunate outlet for Deep State handwringing and parents’ rights agitating? Say it isn’t so.

We owe it to our children not to let this shot at vastly improved conditions for learning fall foul to strained ideological bickering.

A ban on phones at schools is far less important for the children of parents who have time to read and promote the anti-phone writings of the likes of Jonathan Haidt than it is for the average kid. The Haidt-inclined school districts and systems in Maine are, out of studied self-interest, capable of securing these bans by and for themselves.

It’s the rest of us, then, who stand to benefit from the prompt and responsible action of a clued-in administration. That action shouldn’t be interfered with for political reasons. Let’s make level the playing field of learning, of connection, in the interest of all.