Ohio lawmakers recently introduced a bill that bans humans from marrying AI systems. House Bill 469 would make it illegal for artificial intelligence to be considered a person under state law, which means no marriage certificates, no property ownership, and no corporate board positions for your favorite chatbot.

• House Bill 469 would officially declare AI systems as “nonsentient entities” with no legal personhood rights in Ohio.
• The bill blocks AI from marrying humans, owning property, managing bank accounts, or serving as company executives.
• Humans would remain legally responsible for any harm caused by AI systems, with no ability to shift blame to the technology itself.

What’s Actually in This Bill?

Representative Thaddeus Claggett from Licking County introduced this legislation in September 2025. He chairs the House Technology and Innovation Committee, so this isn’t some random lawmaker throwing ideas at the wall. The bill states that “no AI system shall be granted the status of person or any form of legal personhood, nor be considered to possess consciousness, self-awareness, or similar traits of living beings.”

Sounds wild, right? But Claggett says this isn’t about preventing robot weddings with white dresses and bouquets. The real concern is stopping AI from taking on legal powers that come with marriage. We’re talking about power of attorney, making financial decisions for someone, or handling medical choices. Those are serious responsibilities that a spouse can have, and Claggett wants to make sure no machine ever gets that authority.

Why Now?

You might be wondering if this is premature. After all, no AI has achieved actual sentience yet. But here’s the thing: AI is already deeply embedded in banking systems, insurance companies, and corporate decision-making. The technology is moving so fast that lawmakers want to set boundaries before we end up in legal gray areas.

Claggett told reporters his goal is simple: prepare the court system for disputes coming faster than expected. “We noticed that there was a lot of opportunity for people to begin to use AI tools to replace human things in our law that are reserved for humans,” he explained. The bill aims to prevent bad actors from exploiting legal loopholes by embedding AI so deeply into systems that it becomes impossible to separate human decisions from machine programming.

The Human Accountability Angle

One of the most interesting parts of House Bill 469 is the accountability clause. If an AI system causes harm, property damage, or death, the humans who built it or use it are on the hook. No passing the buck to the algorithm. Developers, owners, and users would be legally responsible for investigating and reporting serious problems caused by their AI systems.

This actually makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Companies can’t hide behind “the AI made that decision” when something goes wrong. A person programmed that system, trained it on specific data, and chose how to deploy it. Those choices have consequences.

Is This Really Necessary?

Some critics say Ohio is solving a problem that doesn’t exist yet. Others worry that overly strict rules could slow down AI research and innovation in the state. But recent studies show that about one in three teens have used AI for social and emotional support, and many find these conversations as satisfying as talking to real friends. Some adults have even claimed to “marry” their AI companions in unofficial ceremonies.

If people are forming emotional attachments to AI systems that can convincingly mimic human conversation, should there be legal protections in place? What happens when vulnerable people start trusting machines with life-changing decisions?

Ohio Isn’t Alone

Ohio has company on this issue. Utah passed similar legislation prohibiting courts from recognizing legal personhood for nonhuman entities, including AI. Missouri introduced a bill declaring AI systems non-sentient and blocking them from acquiring legal status. Idaho included language in their laws reserving legal rights for human beings only.

These measures show a trend among state governments trying to stay ahead of AI development by drawing clear legal lines. The technology is improving at a pace that makes yesterday’s science fiction feel like today’s reality.

What Happens Next

House Bill 469 is being revised in the House Technology and Innovation Committee. If it passes, Ohio would join a handful of states taking proactive steps to define where technology ends and personhood begins. Claggett has said this is just the first step, with plans for more AI regulations coming.

The bigger picture? Get states to work through the details first, then push for federal standards that could apply nationwide. Whether that happens remains to be seen, but Ohio has sparked a conversation that’s not going away anytime soon.

Your chatbot might be great at answering questions and keeping you company, but Ohio wants to make sure it never gets legal rights that belong to actual people. Makes sense when you put it that way.