LGBT rights in Ohio


Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons in the U.S. state of Ohio may face some legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Same-sex sexual activity is legal in Ohio, and same-sex marriage has been legally recognized since June 2015 as a result of Obergefell v. Hodges. Ohio statutes do not address discrimination on account of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing or public accommodations; however, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia established that employment discrimination against LGBT people is illegal. In addition, a number of Ohio cities have passed anti-discrimination ordinances providing further protections. Conversion therapy is also banned in a number of cities.
Recent opinion polls have shown that LGBT rights enjoy popular support in the state. A 2016 Public Religion Research Institute survey showed that 61% of Ohio residents supported same-sex marriage. Another survey by the same pollster in 2019 showed that 71% of respondents favored non-discrimination laws protecting LGBT people.

Legality of same-sex sexual activity

As part of the Northwest Territory, Ohio inherited the English buggery law, which provided the death sentence for homosexual sexual activity. In 1804, shortly after statehood, the law was repealed and sodomy was legalized. Despite several court decisions and newspaper articles acknowledging sodomy as legal, the Ohio General Assembly made no effort to overturn these decisions or enact a new law over the following decades.
Ohio adopted its first sodomy law in 1885 and later revised it to include fellatio in 1889. It applied to private, consensual activity as well. In 1886, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled in Foster et al v. State that sodomy, or "copulation against nature", required the presence of a male, meaning that lesbian sexual activity was exempt from prosecution and thus legal, whereas homosexual and heterosexual sodomy were both punished by up to 20 years' imprisonment. A 1906 text on state law stated that sodomy could be committed "between two human beings, as between two men, a man and a woman, a man and a boy, a man and a girl, two boys or a boy and a girl where of that age when capable of the crime". Over the following years, numerous court cases dealt with the issue of sodomy, including one in 1915, where a man was sent to the State Reformatory for having engaged in masturbation, and in 1922 where a heterosexual couple caught engaging in sodomy were imprisoned and labelled "moral degenerates" and "sexual perverts" in official judicial documents.
In 1939, the General Assembly passed a "psychopathic offender" law, under which those convicted of sodomy could be sentenced to life in a mental health institution and were not permitted to be released, even if they were "cured", until the expiration of the minimum term for which, if he or she had been imprisoned, the prisoner would be eligible for parol. An appellate court, ruling in 1944 in State v. Forquer, held that cunnilingus fell out of the sodomy statute's scope. A landmark 1957 case resulted in married couples being exempt from prosecution on the ground of sodomy: "the private moral relationship between husband and wife are concerned it is certainly one that rests entirely in the minds of the two of them"; Ohio being the first state in the U.S. to do so.
In 1972, Ohio became the eighth state to repeal its sodomy statute. Nevertheless, it remained a misdemeanor to express romantic or sexual interest to another person of the same sex. However, in 1979's State v. Phipps, the Supreme Court of Ohio narrowed that provision to cover only cases in which the proposition was "unwelcome". The broad discriminatory nature of the application of Ohio's "unwelcome" law was illustrated in State v. Thompson. In 1999, Eric Thompson had made a sexual pass at a jogger and, after the jogger declined, continued on his way. The jogger contacted the police, however, and Thompson was arrested and sentenced to 6 months in jail. In December 2000, the Ohio Eleventh District Court of Appeals reluctantly upheld the trial court decision. In its decision, the Ohio Eleventh said,
What is not clear is why would only apply to same sex solicitation and not to opposite sex solicitation... It is inherently inconsistent for the Ohio legislature to now criminalize homosexual solicitation after it has chosen to decriminalize homosexual conduct between consenting adults.

In May 2002, the Supreme Court of Ohio unanimously overturned Thompson's conviction, writing
It is well settled that "the First and Fourteenth Amendments forbid discrimination in the regulation of expression on the basis of the content of that expression." Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455, 463. Accordingly, we find that R.C. 2907.07 is facially invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 2, Article I of the Ohio Constitution. We therefore reverse Thompson's conviction.

As part of a 2003 overhaul to the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Law, Ohio repealed its anti-gay importuning law.
On June 26, 2003, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas to abolish all remaining sodomy laws and statutes nationwide.

Recognition of same-sex relationships

Marriage

has been legal in Ohio since June 2015.

Defense of Marriage Act

Representative Bill Seitz introduced the Defense of Marriage Act in the state House of Representatives in 2003. It passed the House by a vote of 73–23 in December 2003 and the Senate in an 18–15 vote in January 2004. It was opposed by eleven Democrats, and four Republicans, in the Senate. Governor Bob Taft signed the legislation on February 6, 2004. The legislation was enacted in the aftermath of the Goodridge decision on November 18, 2003 in Massachusetts.

Constitutional amendment

Ballot Issue 1 of 2004 was a constitutional amendment initiated by the General Assembly and approved by a margin of 61%–38%. It amended Article XV, Section 11 of the Ohio Constitution to define marriage as being between "a man and a woman", thus excluding same-sex couples. Official supporters were the Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage and the Traditional Marriage Crusade. The opposition was led by Ohioans for Fairness. Additionally, both Governor Taft and Representative Bill Seitz opposed the amendment on the grounds that it was too vague. This amendment to Ohio's Constitution was later invalidated by the United States Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges.

''Obergefell v. Hodges''

On June 26, 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that Ohio could not deny same-sex couples the right to marry, or refuse to recognize their marriages performed elsewhere; protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This ruling reversed a November 2014 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in those states and nationwide.

Domestic partnerships

Nine cities, the village of Yellow Springs, and the counties of Cuyahoga and Franklin offer domestic partnership registries.

Adoption and parenting

Ohio permits single LGBT individuals, as well as married same-sex couples to adopt.
In addition, lesbian couples have access to assisted reproduction services such as in vitro fertilization. State law recognizes the non-genetic, non-gestational mother as a legal parent to a child born via donor insemination, but only if the parents are married. While there are no specific surrogacy laws in Ohio, the courts have ruled that the practice is legal and surrogacy contracts can be recognized as legally valid. Both gestational and traditional contracts are recognized, though the latter may result in potential legal conflicts and more litigation than the former. The state treats different-sex and same-sex couples equally under the same terms and conditions.

Discrimination protections

Ohio statutes do not address discrimination on account of sexual orientation and gender identity. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is prohibited in state employment under an executive order issued by Governor John Kasich on January 21, 2011. He issued a new executive order on December 19, 2018 to include gender identity or expression.
About thirty Ohio cities and counties have anti-discrimination ordinances prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations. These are Cuyahoga County, and Akron, Athens, Beachwood, Bexley, Bowling Green, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Cleveland Heights, Columbus, Coshocton, Dayton, East Cleveland, Kent, Lakewood, Medina, Newark, Oberlin, Olmsted Falls, Oxford, Sandusky, Shaker Heights, South Euclid, Springfield, Toledo, Westerville, Worthington, Yellow Springs, and Youngstown. Canton bans unfair discrimination against LGBT people but only in employment and housing, not public accommodations. All these jurisdictions account for about a third of the state population.
Others, including Franklin, Hamilton, Lucas, Montgomery, Summit, and Wood counties and Dublin, Gahanna, Hamilton, Laura and Lima, have protections but for city/county employees only.
Amberley, Oberlin, Steubenville and Wickliffe forbid unfair discrimination against LGBT people in housing, but not in the workplace or in public accommodations.

''R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission''

On March 7, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that discrimination on the basis of transgender status is tantamount to discrimination on the basis of "sex", as defined by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also ruled that employers may not use the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to justify discrimination against LGBT people. Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman from Michigan, began working for a funeral home and presented as male. In 2013, she told her employer that she was transgender and planned to transition. She was promptly fired by her boss who argued that "gender transition violat God's commands because a person's sex is an immutable God-given fit." The court held that the dismissal was discriminatory and violated federal law. An appeal to the case was heard by the Supreme Court in the 2019 term, concurrently to Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, under R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is discrimination on the basis of sex, and Title VII therefore protects LGBT employees from discrimination.

Hate crime law

Ohio's hate crime law addresses violence based on race, color, religion or national origin, but not sexual orientation or gender identity. However, since the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law in October 2009 by President Barack Obama, U.S. federal law has addressed crimes motivated by the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. Hate crimes against LGBT people can be prosecuted in federal court
The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, is an Act of Congress, passed on October 22, 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama on October 28, 2009, as a rider to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2010. Conceived as a response to the murders of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., the measure expands the 1969 United States federal hate crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The bill also removes the prerequisite that the victim be engaging in a federally protected activity like voting or going to school, gives federal authorities greater ability to engage in hate crimes investigations that local authorities choose not to pursue, provides $5 million per year in funding for fiscal years 2010 through 2012 to help state and local agencies pay for investigating and prosecuting hate crimes and requires the Federal Bureau of Investigation to track statistics on hate crimes based on gender and gender identity.

Freedom of expression

In 2012, 16-year-old high school student Maverick Couch, represented by Lambda Legal, sued the Waynesville Local School District after being told he could not come to school wearing a T-shirt with the words "Jesus is not a homophobe". The board explained their position, "Wayne Local School District Board of Education had the right to limit clothing with sexual slogans, especially in light what was then a highly charged atmosphere, in order to protect its students and enhance the educational environment. Consequently, the high school principal was well within the bounds of his authority to request that the student remove his T-shirt and refrain from wearing the T-shirt in the future." The suit ended in a judgement in federal court in Cincinnati agreed to by all parties to the suit that affirmed Couch's right to wear the shirt to school and ordered the school district to pay $20,000 in damages and legal fees.

Transgender rights

Following a 1987 court case, In re Ladrach, Ohio does not allow persons born in the state to amend the gender marker on their birth certificate following sex reassignment surgery. Transgender people can however change their legal name and gender on their Ohio ID and driver's license. In order for them to do so, they must submit a court order certifying the name change and/or a Declaration of Gender Change form signed by a physician or psychologist certifying the applicant's gender identity.
In late March 2018, four transgender Ohioans sued the Ohio Department of Health, seeking to have In re Ladrach overruled and be issued birth certificates reflecting their gender identity. At the time the lawsuit was filed, Ohio was one of just three states where transgender people were banned from amending their birth certificates.

Conversion therapy

A bill to prohibit the use of conversion therapy on LGBT minors in Ohio was introduced by Senator Charleta Tavares in February 2015. The bill died without any legislative action.
As of August 2019, seven Ohio cities have explicitly banned conversion therapy on minors: Cincinnati, Toledo, Columbus, Dayton, Athens, Lakewood, and Kent.

Public opinion

A 2017 Public Religion Research Institute opinion poll found that 61% of Ohioans supported same-sex marriage, while 33% opposed it and 6% were unsure.
The same poll found that 69% of Ohioans supported an anti-discrimination law covering sexual orientation and gender identity. 25% were opposed. Furthermore, 60% were against allowing public businesses to refuse to serve LGBT people due to religious beliefs, while 34% supported allowing such religiously-based refusals.
Poll sourceDate
administered		Sample
size		Margin of
error		% support% opposition% no opinion
2,160?71%23%6%
2,065?68%26%6%
2,750?69%25%6%
3,349?69%26%5%

Summary table