PolicyBrief
H.R. 2350
119th CongressMar 26th 2025
Cellphone Jamming Reform Act of 2025
IN COMMITTEE

This Act limits the FCC's authority to prohibit state and federal correctional facilities from using authorized cellphone jamming systems within their premises under specific operational and funding conditions.

David Kustoff
R

David Kustoff

Representative

TN-8

LEGISLATION

Prison Cellphone Jamming Gets Green Light: FCC Power Over Airwaves Curtailed

The Cellphone Jamming Reform Act of 2025 is pretty straightforward: it explicitly allows federal and state prisons to use signal-jamming technology inside their facilities to stop inmates from using illegal cell phones. This is a big deal because, until now, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has largely prohibited this kind of jamming, viewing it as illegal interference with the public airwaves. This bill essentially tells the FCC to step aside when it comes to correctional facilities.

The Security-First Approach

This legislation is focused squarely on security. It defines a “jamming system” as any equipment designed to block signals going to or from a “contraband device” (the illegal cell phones inmates use) or communications involving the inmates themselves. If this bill passes, correctional facilities can finally deploy these systems without the FCC breathing down their necks. For prison staff, this is a huge potential win, as contraband phones are a major security headache, often used to coordinate crimes, intimidate witnesses, or organize violence both inside and outside the walls.

Who Pays and Where It Stops

While the bill clears the regulatory hurdle, it sets up some crucial boundaries. First, the jamming is only allowed within the actual housing areas of the prison. This is the bill’s attempt to prevent signal disruption from bleeding out into the surrounding community—a major concern for people living near prisons. Second, if a state prison decides to use this technology, the state government must cover 100% of the costs—setup, operation, and maintenance. The federal government isn't subsidizing state security here. This means state taxpayers will be footing the bill, which could be substantial given the complexity of the technology and the required maintenance.

Real-World Ripple Effects

For the average person, the most immediate potential impact isn't the prison security upgrade but the risk of signal bleed. Imagine you live a mile from a state prison. While the bill mandates jamming stays within the facility, these systems aren't always perfect. If the signals leak, you might find your own cell service—the one you use for work calls, GPS, or emergency 911—getting spotty or dropping entirely. Furthermore, the bill requires the facility to coordinate with local police and public safety officials before flipping the switch. This is meant to protect critical services like first responders, but it requires diligent planning and strict adherence to the rules to ensure legitimate emergency communications aren't accidentally knocked offline.

Overriding the Airwaves Watchdog

The most significant policy shift here is the limitation on the FCC’s authority (SEC. 2). The FCC is the traditional referee of the airwaves, ensuring that different signals don't interfere with each other. By carving out an exception for correctional facilities, the bill grants new, powerful authority to prisons to interfere with the electromagnetic spectrum. While this is done with a clear public safety goal—stopping crime coordinated by inmates—it sets a precedent for overriding the national body tasked with managing telecommunications. For busy people who rely heavily on wireless connectivity for everything from work to family logistics, any change in how the airwaves are managed, even locally, is worth watching closely.