SB 1137, the Cellphone Jamming Reform Act of 2025, would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from blocking a state or federal correctional facility from using jamming equipment inside the facility to disrupt wireless communications. The bill defines a “jamming system” broadly to include the equipment, antennas, cabling, installation, power levels, frequencies, and antenna placement used to interfere with wireless signals to or from contraband devices or people held in the facility.
The bill would allow jamming only within the housing areas of a correctional facility and would require state facilities to pay the full cost of the system and its operation. It also requires the facility to consult with local law enforcement and other public safety officials before implementation and to notify the Director of the Bureau of Prisons. The measure is framed as a limitation on FCC authority, overriding other laws or regulations that would otherwise prevent such systems from operating.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would narrow the FCC’s ability to regulate or prohibit in-facility cellphone jamming at prisons and jails, creating a federal carveout for correctional institutions. It would affect communications regulation, prison administration, and public safety policy by authorizing a practice that is generally restricted under existing federal law and FCC rules. State correctional facilities would also face a direct fiscal obligation to fund the entire system, while federal facilities would gain authority to deploy jamming subject to the bill’s location and notification requirements.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to measure support or opposition. Based on the bill’s sponsorship by a group of Republican senators and its public-safety framing, the measure appears intended to appeal to concerns about contraband cellphones, inmate coordination, and prison security. At the same time, the absence of recorded discussion means the level of bipartisan support or institutional resistance cannot be determined from the provided materials.
Contention
The central point of contention is likely to be the tradeoff between prison security and broader communications policy. Supporters would emphasize stopping contraband-device use, criminal activity, and threats to staff and public safety, while opponents may raise concerns about interference with lawful wireless communications, technical risks, and the FCC’s role in managing radio spectrum. Another likely issue is cost: the bill requires states to bear the full expense of any jamming system, which could draw objections from state governments and correctional administrators.