HB 96, Internet Age Verification for Obscenity or Material Harmful to Juveniles
In force
Ohio Rev. Code sections 1349.10 and 1349.101
Effective 2025-09-30 · Applies to private
Any entity that sells, disseminates, or presents material or a performance that is obscene or harmful to juveniles on the internet must verify that a user, and any person creating an account or subscription, is 18 or older using reasonable methods such as government-issued identification, a commercial age verification system, or transactional data, and must reverify age every two years. The law exempts entities that qualify as interactive computer services under federal law, an exemption the Attorney General says most major pornography sites are relying on to avoid compliance, and which lawmakers were considering narrowing as of early 2026.
| Age threshold | 18 |
| Verification methods | gov id, transactional data, third party service |
| Penalties | Injunctive relief sought by the Attorney General after written notice and a 45 day cure period; repeat violations may be pursued without a new cure period. |
| Enforcement body | Ohio Attorney General (exclusive authority) |
| Private suits | no |
Source: Ohio Rev. Code sections 1349.10 and 1349.101
HB 33, Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act
Enjoined
Ohio Rev. Code section 1349.09
Effective 2024-01-15 · Applies to private
Operators of social media platforms directed to or reasonably expected to be accessed by children must obtain verifiable parental consent, through methods such as a signed form, credit card verification, phone or video call, or government ID, before allowing a child under 16 to create an account. Operators must also disclose available content moderation and parental control features.
| Age threshold | 16 |
| Verification methods | parental consent, gov id |
| Penalties | Civil penalties up to $1,000 per day for the first 60 days of noncompliance, up to $5,000 per day for days 61 through 90, and up to $10,000 per day thereafter. |
| Enforcement body | Ohio Attorney General (exclusive authority) |
| Private suits | no |
Litigation: NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 25-3371 (6th Cir.); underlying No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio) (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit). The Act was blocked from its January 15, 2024 start (TRO, then preliminary injunction) and permanently enjoined by the district court on April 16, 2025. On June 18, 2026 the Sixth Circuit reversed in a divided decision, holding NetChoice lacked third-party standing to raise its members' minor users' First Amendment rights and failed to show the Act facially unconstitutional on its own claims, and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for the Attorney General. As of July 15, 2026 the appellate mandate had not yet issued; NetChoice obtained an extension to July 16, 2026 to decide whether to seek panel rehearing or rehearing en banc, so the district court injunction technically remained in place pending the mandate, after which the law is cleared to be enforced.
Source: Ohio Rev. Code section 1349.09