Eight New York City parents seeking to end the cell phone ban in city schools lost their lawsuit against the Department of Education (DOE). The case, Price v. New York City DOE, was heard in the New York County Supreme Court on May 7, 2007.
Although the plaintiffs agree that banning the use of cell phones in schools is justified, they contested that the current policy unreasonably restricts a student’s right to the possession of a cell phone.
Parents’ Association (PA) Recording Secretary Ellen Bilofsky was a plaintiff in the case. “Students should have the right to use phones before and after school,” she said.
Bilofsky said that the cell phone ban compromises students’ safety. Her daughter was a Stuyvesant freshman when the World Trade Center was attacked.
“It was her fourth day of school and after she was evacuated, we had absolutely no way of [getting] in contact with her,” said Bilofsky.
Eamonn Foley, a lawyer for the city, said in a statement, “The Court correctly held that the DOE has a rational basis to adopt its Cell Phone Policy and that the policy does not violate any constitutional rights of students or their parents.”
The Stuyvesant PA supported the plaintiffs. PA Co- President Lauren Coleman- Lochner said that the PA was “among the earliest [organizations] to pass a resolution supporting the goals of the lawsuit.”
PA Vice President Simeon Baum agreed. “[The current policy] is not a sensible policy. It doesn’t take into consideration the needs of parents and children.”
The Chancellor’s Parents Advisory Council, which represents the PA’s of every school in New York City, also supported the plaintiffs. Bilofsky said this issue “has drawn support from parents across the state like no other issue before.”
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit will appeal the judge’s decision to the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court. They will file a notice of appeal within the next month, with oral arguments beginning sometime in September.
The plaintiffs scheduled a press conference to announce the appeal on Thursday, May 24. “We wanted to reinstate the importance of these issues,” said Bilofsky.
Norman Siegel, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, spoke at the event.
According to Bilofsky, Justice Lewis Bart Stone, who presided over the case, seemed to suggest that a school’s principal has the right to exempt students from the cell phone ban under certain circumstances.
However, Principal Stanley Teitel said that medical excuses are the only exceptions he can make to the cell phone policy. If a student provides valid medical documentation, a student can bring a cell phone to school, but it must be stored with Assistant Principal Organization Randi Damesek for the day.
Teitel said that he was not surprised by the outcome of the lawsuit. “I never clearly understood what the [parents’] basis for winning [was],” he said.
Cell phones and other communication devices have been banned in city school since the late 1980s, but principals at schools without metal detectors used an “out-of-sight, out-oftrouble” approach.
In April 2006, city officials began sending portable metal detectors to a random set of schools everyday. This had led to the confiscation of hundreds of cell phones.
Teitel said that there are several reasons for the cell phone ban. “A cell phone rings in the middle of a lesson. The student has to do something about it,” he said. “You can’t tell me that that’s not disruptive.”
There is also concern about cell phones being used to cheat on tests. “We’ve received all kinds of bulletins about textmessaging between students,” said Teitel. “[Cell phones] used to be collected at Regents.”
Many Stuyvesant students do not support the cell phone ban and continue to bring their cell phones to school.
“Students should have cell phones in case of an emergency,” said junior Albert Du. “The students should have the peace of mind knowing that they can communicate with their parents.”