@HImom - yes - I see your point. Perhaps he did make a mistake, but why did airline personnel need to see his phone and read the text he sent? What if the text had gone into more detail? Would he have been arrested? Why did they threaten to take his phone? It seems like they were more concerned about the content of the text message than the fact that he had used his phone.
Perhaps the reason the plane had to return to the terminal was a bomb threat or some other terror threat (not really a mechanical issue). Who knows? Maybe they wanted to see whether he was contacting his confederates about the thwarted attempt or telling them to escape or who knows what? There are a lot of possibilities these days with so many nuts running around doing dangerous things. I have no idea what the true story is/was, nor do you or he.
Where is busdriver? (pilot, I think)
@HImom - interesting theories.
I think in the moment, he was just trying to spare his elderly father from making an unnecessary trip to the airport when he was clearly going to be several hours late. It probably did not seem like a big deal to him.
I’m sure the airline also has PR in mind: airline doesn’t want videos of the turbulence – or any fallout (no pun intended) – going viral.
Remember the international flight that travelled a number of hours and then had to turn back - and Christy Tiegen and John Legend were on the flight - she was live tweeting the whole thing. Or the videos of the guy dragged off the plane? Seems like it is generally allowed.
Unless the flight was a very short one, it seems like there was plenty of time before his father would have had to leave for the destination airport, so that the text message would not be urgent enough that it could not wait until cell phones were allowed to be used.
I’ve never been on a flight when we were told to brace ourselves and no communication, but I wasn’t on the flight your relative was one. Perhaps that no communication is a response to all that live tweeting of recent airline events but it might be due to other things. If no one is told at the time or afterwards, it is tough to know. @busdriver11 as a pilot would have more insight than us passengers.
If I was told not to use my phone and brace myself for a rough landing, I would do just that and perhaps complain later, if I thought it was warranted.
Airlines have rules about taking photos on the plane, especially if they have crew (including flight attendants) in them. The woman next to me on a flight was irked at people’s large carry-ins and was snapping photos that had flight attendants in the background. She was met by security coming onto the plane at our destination. It is a terroriam security risk according to the flight attendant.
Now given recent bad publicity via videos on planes, I can see how airlines might have other motives as well.
IMO, it was also done to prevent panic on board and make folks listen to and follow the crew instructions. If someone got their phone out and started calling their families telling them that it is likely the last time they heard from them, this could have cause a ripple effect of anxiety and panic on board.
The Legend/Tiegen flight reportedly was due to an “unauthorized person” on the flight. Not an equipment issue with the plane. Your relative’s situation sounds more like an equipment issue if they told passengers to get in the crash position.
@ucbalumnus - yes - it was an hour flight. He was concerned that by the time they landed in Atlanta his father would have already left for the airport.
We need @busdriver11
I’m sure busdriver can weigh in but packages are better at listening and not using their cell phones than people. 
I don’t quite get the sequence of events. The text was sent after the “bumpy landing”? Or when the passengers were told to get into crash position? This would make a difference to me.
Honestly, I’m not 100% sure. I believe it was after they were told the plane was turning around and heading back to Atlanta for a mechanical issue and not to use their phones, but before being told to assume crash landing position. I do understand he erred by using his phone to send a text after being told not to do so. But I still do not understand how the airline personnel could demand to see his phone and read the text and threaten to confiscate the phone. That seems very heavy handed to me.
It does seem heavy handed.
I wonder who reported him? Whether a flight attendant saw him or another passenger. Who would even report a fellow passenger for that?
He probably could have refused to show his phone, and if they had denied him boarding on the replacement flight he probably could have won a dispute.
Sometimes everyone involved in a situation is wrong - the passenger who uses his phone when he has clearly been told not to (but my need is more special than everyone else’s!!!) and the airline employees who overreact long after any danger has passed.
Why did they say not to use cellphones? Is it safety related? “No photos” sounds more like media black out like a French airlines did several weeks ago.
^ I agree that it was probably a media blackout type situation.
But I don’t know the whole situation. Presumably only the flight attendants did. But even then I would have complied. He probably would have gotten the “Ok to use cell phones now” message a few minutes after he sent the text.
If the flight attendants said to buckle your seat belt would you stand up because you want to stretch? I think it’s fair to assume they know more about what’s going on than passengers do and rules being laid down are for your own good.