Cellphones would disappear from Massachusetts public school classrooms (as they already have in Needham), and teens would face new social media age limits, under legislation that has generated both praise and questions in Needham as it moves to the state Senate.
The measure titled “An Act to promote student learning and mental health,” cleared the House of Representatives 129-25 April 8 and is now headed to the state Senate.
The legislation would require social media companies to verify users’ ages and prohibit children younger than 14 from having social media accounts. Older minors — 15- and 16-year-olds — would require parental consent. It would also prohibit cellphone use during the school day.
Lawmakers, joined by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, filed the bill in July 2025, and it has since undergone several revisions.
Needham’s State Rep. Joshua Tarsky supports the bill. “I think that’s going to help schools, faculty, staff, the communities and the students,” he said.
Tarsky previously worked as a teacher in Lawrence and served as the principal of Holbrook Middle High School.
“One of the things that I saw the most was a correlation between social media and phone use and social emotional stress and anxiety,” said Tarsky. “I think putting some boundaries around that, which this bill does, is going to help students. It’s going to help communities and families, not just with student discipline issues, but also mental health in general.”
Alisa Skatrud, chair of the Needham School Committee, agreed.
“I think early use of social media is not particularly helpful to children, and if it were harder for children, I think that would be very appropriate,” she said. All three of Skatrud’s children graduated from or are currently attending Needham Public Schools.
Skatrud said Needham Public Schools have already implemented policies to curb device use in classrooms, and she supports stricter rules on social media companies but worries about how the law would be enforced.
“That’s a big burden to put on our teachers. Maybe it makes it easier if it’s just a blanket thing that was handed to us,” said Skatrud. “I’m curious to see how it would be operationalized and what the recommendations are to operationalize it.”
The age-verification provisions have faced backlash over privacy concerns, potential harm to LGBTQ+ youth and potential First Amendment violations.
Fight for the Future, a nonprofit digital rights group, issued a press release calling the bill “draconian and laughably unconstitutional.”
“Do Massachusetts lawmakers believe that young people have nothing valuable to contribute to society? That’s what this bill seems to say,” Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future and a Boston-based transgender activist, wrote in a statement. “This legislation would have kicked Greta Thunberg off social media before she organized her climate protest. How does that make kids safer?”
“Trans youth in Massachusetts are already terrified of losing their healthcare. They’re being terrorized by a bigoted administration,” wrote Greer, who described the bill as bad legislation. “Now, Massachusetts lawmakers are advancing legislation that would cut them off from access to lifesaving online resources and support? Shameful doesn’t begin to cover it.”
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that a Texas law that requires age-verification requirements for adults to view sexually explicit content online did not violate the First Amendment.
Nonetheless, similar state laws in other states faced legal challenges. A Florida law restricting social media access for minors under 16 was challenged in federal court, and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in March 2026 but has not ruled on the case.
“I think it’s something that’s necessary to protect minors,” said Tarsky. Tarsky is also a co-sponsor of the Massachusetts Consumer Data Privacy Act, which would limit how companies collect and use personal data. That measure has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
“This is the dilemma of our time, balancing the needs of our young people with privacy concerns,” said Skatrud. “I don’t know that there’s any easy answer. I think those privacy concerns are valid.”
Both Skatrud and Tarsky believe that the bill will face legal challenges if it passes.
The House bill is not the only proposed legislation on the topic. A week after the House vote, Gov. Maura Healey followed up the bill with her own legislation she described as “complementary” — capping minors’ daily use of social media at two hours and disabling features such as auto-playing videos.
That bill also drew concerns. Greer and a group of advocates protested outside the Boston Public Library April 26 as Healey appeared on GBH’s midday radio show “Boston Public Radio.”
According to GBH, Greer handed Healey an analysis of her bill, with a summary of concerns, as she left the studio following the radio appearance. Among them: age verification and definitions of social media so broad that Greer’s group believes could include websites such as Wikipedia and the Trevor Project.
Skatrud said she agreed that children’s social media use needs to be managed but doubts legislation is the best way forward. Recalling her own high school days, when she and her friends passed notes in a shared notebook during class, she said guidance and education, rather than legislation alone, would serve students better in the long run.
“Technology issues are challenging for all of us, no matter what our age, and I am not convinced that legislation is the best route,” she said. “But I am convinced that we need to continue to find ways for our young people to be holistically well and happy and engaged in their world.”
This story was written by a journalism student in BU’s Newsroom program, a partnership between the university, The Needham Observer and other news organizations in the Boston area.
Save as PDF