Ohio State Laws
✅ Law #1: Senate Bill 1 — Advance Ohio Higher Education Act
📝 What it does
Overhauls how state universities and colleges operate under the new “Advance Ohio Higher Education Act.” (Wikipedia)
Bans diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) based hiring and enrollment in state higher ed institutions. (Wikipedia)
Prohibits faculty strikes in public colleges or universities. (Wikipedia)
💰 Cost to taxpayers / state budget
State might save or redirect funds used for DEI programs / enforcement; possible costs for implementing compliance and monitoring.
Potential legal costs (if lawsuits over DEI ban or related claims arise).
👥 Who it helps / affects
Helps: Those who prefer policies focused on merit/hiring without DEI; institutions that opposed DEI mandates.
Affects: DEI offices, faculty/staff whose work involves DEI; students who may be impacted by enrollment or support changes.
⚙️ Who sponsored / who opposed
Sponsor: Sen. Jerry R. Cirino (and others) (Wikipedia)
Opposition: Advocates for diversity/higher education, civil rights groups.
✅ Pros & ❌ Cons
✅ Pros:
Simplifies/harmonizes higher ed policy; may reduce administrative burdens relating to DEI compliance.
❌ Cons:
Many argue DEI helps underrepresented students; removing it may reduce access or support.
Potential reputational / accreditation / litigation risk.
🗳️ The Ballot Beacon Takeaway
As of June 27, 2025, Ohio’s SB 1 reshapes higher education by removing DEI hiring/enrollment policies and banning public college faculty strikes — a major shift, with trade-offs in diversity and institutional flexibility.
✅ Law #2: House Bill 96 — State Operating Budget & “Innocence Act” Provisions
📝 What it does
💰 Cost to taxpayers / state budget
Budget allocates funds for state programs; cost is what’s appropriated.
Compliance for websites with “Innocence Act” provision may impose operational / verification costs on site operators, not directly state cost.
👥 Who it helps / affects
Helps: State programs funded under this budget; proponents of youth protection online.
Affects: Businesses/websites that host adult content (they’ll have to verify age); citizens’ access to content may change.
⚙️ Who sponsored / opposed
Sponsored by Ohio Legislature and signed by Governor Mike DeWine. (Wikipedia)
Opposition likely from privacy advocates, internet industry or free-speech interests.
✅ Pros & ❌ Cons
✅ Pros:
Ensures protection of minors from viewing explicitly adult content.
Provides stability through the budget cycle for state operations.
❌ Cons:
Adult content providers have extra compliance burden.
Could raise questions about free speech and privacy.
🗳️ The Ballot Beacon Takeaway
Ohio’s HB 96 becomes law Sept 30, 2025: funding for state operations plus rules requiring age verification for adult content sites via the “Innocence Act” — balancing youth protections with free speech concerns.
✅ Law #3: House Bill 8 — Ohio Parents’ Bill of Rights
Statute / Bill: HB 8 (136th General Assembly) (Axios)
Effective: April 9, 2025 (Ohio Secretary of State)
📝 What it does
💰 Cost to taxpayers / state budget
Minimal direct state cost; school districts need to update policies.
Some administrative cost for implementing policy changes and communication.
👥 Who it helps / affects
Helps: Parents who want to be informed; those supporting religious instruction rights.
Affects: School districts; potentially students whose privacy around identity is sensitive; education staff.
⚙️ Who sponsored / opposed
Supported by proponents of parental rights and religious liberty.
Opposed by LGBTQ+ advocates concerned about student privacy and inclusion.
✅ Pros & ❌ Cons
✅ Pros:
Enhances transparency and involvement for parents.
Recognizes religious instruction preferences.
❌ Cons:
Could create tension around student privacy and identity.
Some say puts parents in unequally strong position over children’s rights.
🗳️ The Ballot Beacon Takeaway
Effective April 9, 2025, Ohio’s Parents’ Bill of Rights (HB 8) requires schools to inform parents of changes in a student’s health or identity and allow religious release time — increasing parental say, raising debates around privacy.
✅ Law #4: New School Cell Phone Policy Requirement & Miscellaneous K-12 Rules
📝 What it does
💰 Cost to taxpayers / state budget
Very minimal. Mostly policy drafting and training for school staff.
👥 Who it helps / affects
Helps: Teachers & students (reduces distractions); parents who believe devices disrupt learning.
Affects: Students who use phones; schools that must enforce policy.
⚙️ Who sponsored / opposed
Supported by education stakeholders looking for consistency. Some opposition or concern from students / parents who believe phones have legitimate uses (e.g. emergencies, education apps).
✅ Pros & ❌ Cons
✅ Pros:
Helps reduce distractions; may improve academic focus.
Establishes clear rules and consistency across schools.
❌ Cons:
Enforcement could be uneven; students may push back or find ways around rules.
Some use of phones in instructional or emergency settings might be restricted.
🗳️ The Ballot Beacon Takeaway
Starting July 2025, Ohio public schools must have cell-phone policies in place for the 2025-26 year — limiting student use in class, with model policy support; small admin cost, big impact on daily school life.