OhioOhio would bar state agencies from using AI for public assistance
Ohio agencies would face limits on AI use, employers would disclose automated job decisions, and public employers would provide human review.
What it does
State agencies and others acting for them would be barred from using AI in work involving public assistance benefits. Uses materially affecting people's rights, safety, or welfare would need specific permission in law.
State and local governments and private employers with at least four Ohio workers would give advance notice when automated tools help make job decisions and could not use them to discriminate. Domestic workers are excluded.
Public employers would provide human review of automated job decisions. After a harmful decision, applicants and workers could inspect and correct the data used and appeal to a human reviewer.
Public employers would need independent bias audits for automated job tools. If the latest audit found unequal effects on protected groups, starting use would require showing they made fixes approved by the commerce director.
Argument forHuman review could catch errors before public employers make harmful job decisions, while later appeals could let applicants and workers correct bad data.
Argument againstRequiring specific legal permission to buy AI could keep state agencies from using helpful tools while they wait for lawmakers to act.
More detail
State agencies would face limits on buying and using AI, along with independent bias checks. The use limits would cover state agencies and others acting for them. Common tools such as word processors, spreadsheets, and calculators are excluded. AI purchases would need specific permission in law. Agencies would obtain independent bias audits before deploying purchased AI and publish the results at least 60 days before use. Agencies could remove information that identifies people from published audits.
Covered employers would give advance written notice when automated tools help make employment decisions and avoid discriminatory use. Coverage includes state and local government employers and private employers with at least four workers in Ohio. Domestic workers are excluded. The notice would identify the tool and the types and sources of personal information it would analyze. The discrimination rule would cover harmful employment actions based on listed personal traits or victim status.
Public employers would have people review automated job decisions. These safeguards would cover Ohio state and local public employers, including school districts. Applicants and workers could refuse use of their personal data to assess them for automated decisions affecting their legal rights or having similarly major effects. After a harmful decision, they could inspect and correct the data and appeal to a human reviewer. Human review would occur before a harmful job decision.
Public employers would obtain independent audits checking automated job tools for bias. This would cover Ohio state and local public employers, including school districts. Employers would have to show they carried out corrective steps approved by the commerce director before starting use of a tool whose latest audit found unequal effects on protected groups. Employers would publish a plain-language audit summary. An audit would be required no later than one year before planned use, with audits annually afterward.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Oct 22IntroducedIntroduced
AI & PrivacyEconomy & JobsGovernment & Ethics