COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio leaders acknowledge that artificial intelligence should be regulated as both explicit and political content grows, but bills have remained stagnant. Now, they say they aren't sure what they are able to enforce.
Political ads are required to come with some disclaimers, like who paid for them. But it’s getting even more difficult to tell what is real, because deepfakes — AI-generated pictures and videos — aren't outlawed.
A video posted by a conservative political action committee called Ohio Flyer PAC features former U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown sitting at a birthday party, refusing to leave. A woman in the video complains about the Democratic candidate, as text on the screen says, "THE PARTY'S OVER, SHERROD." There is no admission that the video is AI.
In a contentious primary battle between two Republicans seeking the same state Senate seat, a mailer from candidate Craig Reidel includes an AI-generated photo of state Rep. Jim Hoops with drag queens. Another doctored animation, shown to me, has Hoops dunking on a teen girl while playing basketball, claiming that he supported males in female sports. From the images we obtained, no disclaimers were included. Reidel won the nomination.
"It is the government's role to regulate responsibly new and emerging technologies," House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn (D-Cincinnati) said.
Ohio doesn’t have regulations on the new-age type of AI-created content, but Isaacsohn said lawmakers have put forward a handful of bills to change that.
House Bill 185 would allow everyone to own their image, and it would be a trademark infringement to produce malicious content without someone’s consent. There could be civil penalties of tens of thousands of dollars.
RELATED: Ohio lawmakers want to crack down on AI deepfakes as explicit content grows online
H.B. 185 is further reaching, but a bipartisan bill introduced in 2024 would have required disclaimers on specifically election-related AI content.
RELATED: Proposed Ohio bill would require disclaimers for political AI deepfakes, add criminal penalties
House Bill 524 would establish penalties for developers whose AI models generate content encouraging self-harm or violence. The state would be able to investigate and impose civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation
RELATED: Ohio lawmakers want AI companies held liable for bot-encouraged suicides
Senate Bill 163 and House Bill 786 would prohibit AI-created child sexual abuse material. These would both make creating, transmitting and possessing AI-CSAM content criminal offenses. S.B. 163 would make it a third-degree felony, while H.B. 786 could result in a second-degree. That could result in up to eight years in prison and $15,000 in fines.
President Donald Trump also signed a bill into law last year that criminalizes AI-generated CSAM under federal law.
In April, a Columbus man became the first in the country convicted of creating this explicit and abusive material, the Department of Justice reported.
Gov. Mike DeWine, in his State of the State Address in March, advocated for these types of state provisions.
"Ohio law needs real consequences," DeWine said. "The Ohio attorney general and county prosecutors must have clear legal tools to hold these tech companies criminally and civilly accountable."
Despite little public opposition, each bill has stalled.
RELATED: Which photo is real? Ohio lawmakers want to regulate deepfakes, AI content
I asked each legislative leader why.
"Why hasn't anything moved?" I asked House Speaker Matt Huffman (R-Lima). There have been bipartisan bills about AI."
"Well, I think, probably two or three points to make," he responded.
Technology can be confusing, he said.
"It's difficult for folks... to wrap our heads exactly around what it is that we can do to do this, or to effect good change," the speaker said.
Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) said that he supports certain AI regulations, such as with pornographic material.
"I'm in favor of passing something that would address those issues, really make it illegal and put it on par with peddling other forms of obscene materials and child pornography," McColley told me.
But there is a committee process that needs to play out, he said.
"I'm sure they have their reasons for taking time on these bills, and hopefully we'll wind up somewhere here very shortly or before the end of the year," the president added.
Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio said that she is concerned about not handling artificial intelligence correctly and safely.
"I think we have to do our homework, and I don't wanna see us just making knee-jerk responses and reactions to policy making without really doing a deep dive in what should this look like," Antonio said.
Public safety concerns, like issues with children and sexual content, are important to "get in front of," she said, but the legislation needs to be done right.
"We're at the beginning of having these kinds of conversations and trying to understand the depth and breadth of what we can even do," Antonio said.
Isaacsohn hammered that point home.
"We have to protect our communities and regulate this new technology in a responsible way," he said. "It should come from the federal government, but no one believes that they're going to do anything positive."
What's possible
Huffman brought up legal concerns, adding that the federal government has "far overreached" since 1803 (when Ohio became the 17th state).
"A state regulation of AI, that's not just going to be within the state of Ohio," Huffman said, noting that the feds typically rely on the Commerce Clause to stop statewide statutes impacting businesses.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order last year that punishes states that create their own AI regulations.
"My Administration must act with the Congress to ensure that there is a minimally burdensome national standard — not 50 discordant State ones," the White House executive order's press release states. "The resulting framework must forbid State laws that conflict with the policy set forth in this order."
A part of the executive order restricts states from accessing a portion of federal funding if their AI regulations are too "onerous."
Congressional Republicans and the White House aren't going to safeguard technology, Isaacsohn said.
"They are bought and paid for by the tech billionaires, and so it is incumbent on states, especially here in Ohio, for us to step up and protect our communities, particularly children, from the potential negative impacts of artificial intelligence," he said.
Trump's order does state that he wants Congress to come up with a plan that does "ensure that children are protected."
Ohio is one of five states that don't have laws criminalizing AI CSAM, according to Enough Abuse, a child advocacy organization. Because federal law already exists making it a crime, this type of regulation likely wouldn't violate the "onerous" warning in the executive order.
But the DOJ is already fighting some regulations. Colorado is currently in a legal battle with both xAI and the DOJ after it passed a law requiring tech developers to prevent "algorithmic discrimination," which could result in "unlawful differential treatment" to users, according to the law.
AI companies have repeatedly said that their products are protected by the First Amendment.
"I don't have a specific answer on AI," Huffman told me. "But we're going to work on it."
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
