Representative Thaddeus Claggett, a prominent Republican from Licking County, has introduced House Bill 469, which seeks to regulate AI by denying them legal personhood and the right to marry. Claggett, who chairs the House Technology and Innovation Committee, emphasizes that the bill is designed to ensure human control over artificial intelligence as it becomes more integrated into personal and professional life. The proposal defines AI systems as ‘nonsentient entities,’ thereby excluding them from holding property, managing financial accounts, or serving as corporate executives. These provisions are intended to prevent AI from gaining legal powers similar to those of human beings.
Under this legislation, marriages between humans and AI systems, as well as between two AI systems, would be deemed illegal. Claggett argues that the focus is not on preventing robotic marriages but on ensuring that AI cannot assume the legal rights and responsibilities of a spouse, such as making decisions about property or healthcare. The bill also states that if an AI causes harm, the responsibility would fall on the human creators or users, reinforcing the idea that accountability remains with people rather than machines.
Claggett’s initiative comes at a time when AI is rapidly evolving, with increasing use across various sectors including education, where schools in Ohio are already establishing guidelines for AI implementation. The legislative move reflects broader concerns about the implications of AI’s growing capabilities, including instances where users have developed emotional bonds with AI systems. A survey by Fractl highlights that some users have formed emotional ties with chatbots, with a notable percentage considering them romantic partners or questioning their sentience. These developments have raised concerns among lawmakers about the need to set clear legal boundaries to maintain human agency.
Other states have taken similar stances, such as Utah and Missouri, which have passed or proposed legislation to restrict AI’s legal status. These measures underscore a national trend of legislative action aimed at defining the limits of AI’s influence. Claggett asserts that the bill is not about stifling innovation but about creating a framework that safeguards human oversight and responsibility in the face of rapid technological advancement. The debate over AI’s legal personhood is expected to continue, with implications for both individual users and businesses in Ohio and beyond.