Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateOhioIntroduced
HB 20: Prohibit harassing or impeding an emergency service responder
Thomas Hall
HB 20 status: Introduced — Effective 10/6/26 (updated Oct 6, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
63OUT OF 100
Score:63/100 civic fit
Risk:Moderate Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 40/100
Constitutionality60%
Bipartisan50%
Public opinion50%
Bill summary
To amend section 2903.22 and to enact section 2927.31 of the Revised Code to prohibit a person from knowingly harassing or impeding an emergency service responder who is engaged in the lawful performance of a legal duty and to clarify that heightened penalties apply for menacing a probation officer.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Society
Mixed / Neutral
55%
Benefits
- Protects emergency responders from interference
- Ensures safer work environments for first responders
- Deters harassment during critical public operations
Risks
- Potential for overbreadth in 'harassing' definitions
- Risk of chilling effect on public assembly and protest
- Potential for selective enforcement in high-tension environments
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Public Health & Safety
Positive outlook
70%
Benefits
- Enhances safety for personnel during emergency responses
- Facilitates faster response times by reducing interference
- Supports the professional safety of probation officers
Risks
- Criminalization does not address root conflict causes
- Lacks focus on non-penal de-escalation training
- Potential for police-responder friction in application
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
The use of subjective terms like 'harassing' may lead to inconsistent judicial interpretations or challenges regarding freedom of speech.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a summary; full text analysis is unavailable.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedCurrent
- CommitteeUpcoming
- Chamber votesUpcoming
- Final agreementUpcoming
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.