OHIO LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION
Office of Research Legislative Budget
www.lsc.ohio.gov and Drafting Office
S.B. 212 Bill Analysis
135th General Assembly
Click here for S.B. 212’s Fiscal Note
Version: As Introduced
Primary Sponsors: Sens. Kunze and DeMora
Effective date:
Austin C. Strohacker, Attorney
SUMMARY
Requires businesses to use reasonable age verification methods in connection with
websites, services, or products where more than one-third of the total material is
“harmful to juveniles.”
Stipulates that material is “harmful to juveniles” if it includes nudity, sexual excitement,
or sado-masochistic abuse; appeals to the prurient interest of juveniles in sex; is
patently offensive; and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Establishes three reasonable age verification methods that businesses may use,
including third-party verification services, public and private transaction data, and state
identification.
Prohibits a business from retaining information obtained for the purposes of age
verification.
Authorizes the Attorney General to enforce the bill through a civil action.
Explicitly exempts news-gathering organizations, as well as internet service providers
(ISPs), search engines, and cloud service providers that facilitate access to a publicly
available website.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Overview
The bill requires businesses to use “reasonable age verification methods” to ensure the
business is not distributing pornographic materials to individuals under the age of 18. The bill
applies to websites, services, or products where more than one-third of the total material is
April 22, 2024
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
“harmful to juveniles.”1 It does not apply to bona fide news reports and does not affect the
rights of any news gathering organization.2 Furthermore, the bill does not prohibit an internet
service provider (ISP), search engine, or cloud service provider from providing access to a
publicly available website, service, or product.3
Material harmful to juveniles
The bill defines material “harmful to juveniles” by reference to a criminal provision in
continuing law. Specifically, it means material or a performance describing or representing
nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sado-masochistic abuse that:
When considered as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest of juveniles in sex;
Is patently offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with
respect to what is suitable for juveniles; and
When considered as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, and scientific value
for juveniles.4
Reasonable age verification methods
The bill provides three methods of reasonably verifying an individual’s age: (1) through
an independent, third-party verification service that compares information entered by
individuals seeking access to pornographic materials to information stored in a commercially
available database regularly used by businesses and government agencies for age and
identification verification, (2) any commercially reasonable method that relies on public or
private transactional data, or (3) a state-issued ID card.5 Businesses are prohibited from
retaining identifying information once the individual has been granted or denied access to the
website, service, or product.6
Businesses that fail to use reasonable age verification methods or retain identifying
information commit an unfair or deceptive practice. The bill authorizes the Attorney General to
remedy violations of the bill by bringing an action for temporary restraining orders, preliminary
or permanent injunctions, or civil penalties.7
1 R.C. 1349.10(A)(12) and (B)(1).
2 R.C. 1349.10(E).
3 R.C. 1349.10(D).
4 R.C. 1349.10(A)(4); R.C. 2907.01(E), not in the bill.
5 R.C. 1349.10(A)(10).
6 R.C. 1349.10(B)(2).
7 R.C. 1349.10(C); R.C. 1345.01 through 1345.13, not in the bill.
P a g e |2 S.B. 212
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
Exceptions
News
The bill explicitly exempts a “bona fide news or public interest broadcast, web site
video, report, or event.” It also stipulates that the bill’s requirements are not to be construed to
affect the rights of a “news-gathering organization,” which the bill defines as either of the
following:
A newspaper, magazine press association, news agency, news wire service, radio or
television station, or similar media;
A person employed or contracted by any of the foregoing to gather, process, transmit,
compile, edit, or disseminate information to the general public.8
ISPs, search engines, and cloud service providers
It is not considered a violation of the bill for an ISP, a search engine, a cloud services
provider, or a subsidiary or affiliate of any of the foregoing to provide juveniles access or
connection to a publicly available online website, service, or product not under the entity’s
control.9 Under the bill, a website, service, or product is “publicly available” if the
communications, content, materials, or information included therein are accessible (whether
free of charge or subject to a fee, subscription, or members-only model) over, on, or through
the internet, a computer or mobile application, or other type of virtual or digital platform.10
For the purposes of the bill, an ISP is a provider of internet services, including all of the
following:
Broadband service, however defined or classified by the Federal Communications
Commission;
Information service or telecommunications service, both as defined in the
“Telecommunications Act of 1996”;
Internet protocol-enabled service, which is defined under continuing law as a service,
capability, functionality, or application that is provided using internet protocol or a
successor protocol to enable the user to send or receive communications, including a
voice over internet protocol service.11
A “search engine” is a website, service, or product the predominant or exclusive
function of which is to search the internet for other websites, services, or products, or for
information based on a user’s query. “Search engine” does not include websites, services, or
8 R.C. 1349.10(A)(7) and (8).
9 R.C. 1349.10(D).
10 R.C. 1349.10(A)(9).
11 R.C. 1349.10(A)(5); R.C. 4927.01, not in the bill.
P a g e |3 S.B. 212
As Introduced
Office of Research and Drafting LSC Legislative Budget Office
products the predominant or exclusive function of which is to conduct an internal search for
content on a website, service, or product that includes a substantial portion of materials that
are harmful to juveniles.12
A “cloud service provider” is a third-party provider of computing resources that a
business may access on demand over the internet, including cloud-based application,
infrastructure, platform, and storage services.13
State authority to require age verification
Age verification laws and other state and federal measures that address access to social
media and pornography over the internet are sometimes challenged under the First and Fifth
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. For example, in Reno v. ACLU, the U.S. Supreme Court
invalidated, on First Amendment grounds, portions of the “Communications Decency Act of
1996,” that criminalized the knowing transmission of “obscene or indecent” messages to any
recipient under 18 years of age.14
State age verification laws in Texas and Ohio have been challenged and enjoined for
similar reasons in recent months. The Ohio injunction on the state’s “Social Media Parental
Notification Act” remains in place.15 The Texas injunction was recently overturned, in part, by
the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court allowed the age verification of the Texas law to take
effect, but affirmed the injunction against requiring pornographic websites to provide health
warnings to their users.16
HISTORY
Action Date
Introduced 01-16-24
ANSB0212IN-135/ks
12 R.C. 1349.10(A)(11).
13 R.C. 1349.10(A)(2).
14 521 U.S. 844 (1997).
15 R.C. 1349.09; Netchoice, LLC v. Yost, S.D.Ohio No. 2:24-cv-00047, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24129
(February 12, 2024).
16 Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, 95 F.4th 263 (5th Cir. 2024).
P a g e |4 S.B. 212
As Introduced