Ohio House Republican lawmakers voted to pass a massive higher education overhaul bill Wednesday that would ban diversity and inclusion efforts and prevent faculty from striking.
State Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, introduced S.B. 1, which passed the Ohio Senate last month.
Now that it’s been passed by the House, it now heads back to the Ohio Senate for concurrence with changes made to the bill by the House.
Ohio Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, said Wednesday the Senate will concur with House changes at a later date.
After the Senate concurs with the House changes, the bill will go to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s desk and DeWine will have 10 days to sign the bill into law or veto it once he receives it. If DeWine vetoes the bill, lawmakers would need three-fifths vote from each chamber to override it.
In addition to the bans on diversity efforts and faculty strikes, S.B. 1 would also set rules around classroom discussion, create post-tenure reviews, put diversity scholarships at risk, create a retrenchment provision that block unions from negotiating on tenure, shorten university board of trustees terms from nine years down to six years, and require students take an American history course, among other things.
For classroom discussion, the bill would set rules around topics involving “controversial beliefs” such as climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion. S.B. 1 would only affect Ohio’s public universities.
The Ohio House Higher Education Committee voted the bill out of committee Wednesday morning with a 9-4 party-line vote after listening to people testify in support of the bill.
The committee also approved amendments to S.B. 1 that would require universities to stop accepting funds for scholarships with diversity and inclusion requirements four years after the bill becomes law.
Another amendment requires the Chancellor of Higher Education to do a diversity study of students enrolled in universities based on race, ethnicity, and biological sex and submit the report to lawmakers within six years.
Outside of the Ohio Statehouse, a mass of college students and protesters rallied against the bill, saying it would destroy freedom of thought and expression on university campuses and push students out-of-state.
(Photos by David DeWitt, Ohio Capital Journal.) Ohio college students and protesters rally at the Statehouse on March 19, 2025, against Senate Bill 1, a higher education overhaul that bans diversity efforts and faculty strikes, and sets rules around classroom discussion, among other things.
Megan Henry is a reporter for the Ohio Capital Journal and has spent the past five years reporting in Ohio on various topics including education, healthcare, business and crime. She previously worked at The Columbus Dispatch, part of the USA Today Network.
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.
State Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, introduced Ohio House Bill 160 during a press conference Thursday. Similar to the Senate’s bill, the House’s bill would reduce the THC levels in marijuana extracts from a maximum of 90% down to a maximum of 70% and caps the number of marijuana dispensaries to 350. The bill, however, would keep the 10% tax on marijuana and keep Ohio’s home grow at 12 plants.
“Our bill preserves the core of Issue Two, while also adding important protections for Ohio’s minors and addressing the issue of intoxicating hemp,” Stewart said, noting his goal is to pass a marijuana bill before the lawmakers go on summer break.
“Every product that is legal today will remain legal under this bill,” Stewart said. “I think we are making very, very few changes here. … We’re not touching any of the core parts of Issue Two.”
The bill deals directly with intoxicating hemp by requiring every THC product to be treated like marijuana and only be sold at the state’s regulated marijuana dispensaries.
“Simply put, if it gets you high, it goes through a dispensary,” Stewart said. “I don’t think Ohioans are excited about the fact that you get essentially the same thing that’s less safe from a local gas station. I don’t want my kids to go walk into your local gas station chain and buy marijuana.”
The bill would change how the marijuana tax revenue is directed, sending a “bulk of tax revenue to Ohio’s general fund,” Stewart said, mentioning he worked closely with House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, on drafting the bill.
Even though legal weed sales started last year, Ohioans could start legally growing marijuana at home shortly after Issue Two passed in 2023.
Ohio state Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville. Official photo.
“I think the longer you wait, the harder it is to make substitute changes,” Stewart said. “I think in the real world, folks who are growing 12 plants today are not likely to grow less than 12 plants just because we passed a law at the Statehouse.”
H.B. 160 prohibits using marijuana in public spaces, but allows for smoking inside a privately owned property, including outside on a residential front porch.
“It’s legal to use these products at your home,” Stewart said.
The bill would also offer expungement for prior convictions for marijuana related offenses.
“As the views of Ohioans have shifted on the issue of marijuana, our laws should reflect that, and allowing people to remove these offenses from their criminal record is good policy,” Stewart said.
Even though the Senate recently passed their own bill, Stewart doesn’t think his bill will create a possible standstill where nothing gets passed.
“I’m going to leave it to the two gentlemen that hold the gavel as to which bill is moving, but it’s one or the other,” Stewart said.
The Ohio Cannabis Coalition (OHCANN) is still digesting this latest piece of legislation, but Deputy Executive Director Adrienne Robbins seemed optimistic about H.B 160.
“We do think this is a really positive step forward,” she said. “When you look at the Senate bill and the different iterations of it that came out, I think this is another step forward, and it does make us feel like lawmakers are one, listening to us, but then, maybe more importantly, listening to consumers’ concerns as well.”
What’s in the Senate marijuana bill?
Senate Bill 56 would significantly change Ohio’s weed laws.
The bill would limit Ohio’s home grow from 12 plants down to six, reduce the THC levels from a maximum of 90% to a maximum of 70%, and mandates that marijuana can only be used in a private residence.
S.B. 56 allows someone to apply to the sentencing court to have their record expunged if they were convicted or plead guilty to possessing 2.5 ounces of marijuana before the state law went into effect. Under the bill, the applicant must pay a $50 filing fee.
The bill would combine the state’s medical and recreational marijuana programs under the Division of Cannabis Control, require marijuana be transported in the trunk of a car when traveling, and would limit the number of active dispensaries to 350.
It would also ban Ohioans from using marijuana that is not either from a licensed Ohio dispensary or cultivated at a consumer’s home. This would make it illegal for Ohioans to drive up to Michigan to purchase marijuana and bring it back over state lines.
The bill originally dealt with taxes and how funds were distributed, but those provisions were removed during committee.
Shortly after Ohioans voted to legalize marijuana, the Ohio Senate quickly passed a bill that would have made major changes to the law that would have affected taxes and home grow, but the Ohio House never brought the bill to the floor.
Instead, state Rep. Jamie Callender, R-Concord, introduced a bill that would have clarified some of Issue 2’s language, but it never made it out of committee.
Megan Henry is a reporter for the Ohio Capital Journal and has spent the past five years reporting in Ohio on various topics including education, healthcare, business and crime. She previously worked at The Columbus Dispatch, part of the USA Today Network.
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.
Ohio House Republicans passed legislation Friday that would expand the definition of “obstruction of justice” broadly enough to capture protest activity, according to social justice activists and civil rights advocates who testified against the bill.
The legislation would qualify failing to follow a “lawful order from a law enforcement officer” as the obstruction of justice.
It also prohibits a person from interfering with or obstructing a police officer at work with “reckless disregard” as to whether the action diverts or obstructs the officer’s attention. This includes entering or placing an object somewhere that’s large enough that the officer cannot reach a person outside the area.
Republicans said the legislation establishes basic protections for officers after a year of increasing violence and tumultuous social justice protests.
Democrats said the legislation is unhelpful and divisive. Rep. Jeff Crossman, D-Parma, said it “fans the flame of culture wars and is yet another dog whistle about race.”
Crossman offered an amendment to exempt anyone from charges who uses or threatens to use force against an officer if they’re “acting in good faith” to prevent death or serious bodily injury. The amendment failed on party lines.
Additionally, the legislation would prohibit a person from throwing any object or substance at an officer “with intent to distract.”
The bill largely addresses conduct that’s already illegal under Ohio law, according to analysis from the Legislative Service Commission. It provides prosecutors more charges they can impose on alleged violators.
The expanded obstruction of justice charges would be second-degree misdemeanors, or fifth-degree felonies if they cause physical harm to a person. Second-degree misdemeanorconvictions can yield sentences up to 90 days. Fifth-degreefelonies yield sentences between six and 12 months.
After a Minneapolis police officer murdered George Floyd, an unarmed black man suspected of using a fake $20 bill, on camera last summer, massive racial justice protests formed around the country. Activists criticized racial profiling and the excessive use of force from officers unto people of color.
Some of the initial protests descended into violence and looting. However, researchers reviewed 2,400 demonstrations nationwide between May and August 2020 and found fewer than 220 (about 7%) turned violent.
Regardless, Republican-controlled legislatures around the U.S. have introduced and passed different proposals to expand on or build new charges that can be filed against protesters. A more extreme proposal in Ohio sought to expand citizens’ rights to shoot in perceived self-defense during a “riot” — a loosely defined term in Ohio law.
“This bill is not an anti-peaceful protest bill,” said Rep. Shane Wilkin, R-Lynchburg, one of the lead sponsors. “The key word is peaceful.”
The version of the bill advanced by the House Criminal Justice Committee on Thursday is significantly narrower than what was introduced. “Taunt[ing]”an officer would have qualified as the obstruction of justice under the original bill draft.
Republican Reps. Jeff LaRe of Violet Twp. and Wilkin sponsored the proposal. In their written testimony to the committee, they denied any intent to infringe upon individuals’ rights to free speech and assembly. They said it’s about protecting law enforcement officers.
“Peaceful protests have turned violent when bad actors who are not involved in a police matter begin to taunt, harass, and overall interfere with law enforcement officers performing their duties,” they wrote.
Racial justice groups, public defenders, the ACLU, religious organizations focused on social justice and the libertarian Americans for Prosperity spoke out against the bill.
“The language in this bill will prevent innocent bystanders from exercising their Sixth Amendment rights per the U.S. Constitution,” said Tom Roberts, president of the NAACP Ohio Conference.
“With the excessive force issues among our law enforcement here in Ohio and across the country, the timing of this bill is inappropriate and insensitive to many communities of color.”
Advocacy groups representing police and prosecutors testified in support of the bill. Preble County Sheriff Mike Simpson, representing the Buckeye State Sheriffs’ Association, claimed some people seized on the unrest last summer as “an avenue to promote violence.”
House Bill 22, he said, would outlaw “diversionary tactics” from those seeking to distract, disrupt and impede law enforcement.
Analysts with the Legislative Service Commission, which conducts policy research for lawmakers, found the legislation will increase the number of offenders being sentenced to prison and may lengthen some terms. This could increase annual prison costs by between $3,000 and $4,000 per offender.
Thomas Quinlan — who formerly served as Columbus chief of police, including during the protests last summer — testified in support of the bill on similar lines.
In May, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley issued a blistering, 88-page opinion prohibiting Columbus police from using tear gas, pepper spray, batons and rubber bullets against nonviolent protesters. He found officers used force “indiscriminately” and without provocation.
“This case is the sad tale of police officers, clothed with the awesome power of the state, run amok,” he wrote.
Just seven proponents testified in support of the bill, compared to more than 100 who opposed it, as noted by Ohio Legislative Black Caucus President Rep. Thomas West, D-Canton, in a statement after the vote.
He said the bill “further sows the seeds of fear” by attempting to criminalize the right to protest.
“This bill, not to mention similar legislation pending before this body, takes Ohio in the opposite direction of progress,” he said. “HB 22 will not promote the safety and security of our officers and of individuals exercising their First Amendment rights. It will only create more tension and potential for conflict.”
The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration.
