Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Contracting Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sponsors seek repeal of contract anti‑boycott clause, arguing it compels political speech

House General Government Committee · October 28, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representative Abdullahi and co-sponsor Representative Rader told the committee HB 489 would repeal Ohio Rev. Code §9.76 (a requirement that state contractors certify they are not boycotting certain jurisdictions), arguing the provision conditions contracts on political speech and risks chilling constitutional rights; committee members requested data on whether contracts were denied under the law.

Chair Ray called House Bill 489 for its first hearing. Representative Abdullahi, the sponsor, said the statute enacted since 2016 requires all state contracts to include a provision affirming that the contracting entity is not boycotting jurisdictions with which Ohio maintains open trade (including Israel) and argued that requirement forces contractors to declare political positions as a condition of doing business with the state.

Abdullahi said the repeal is not intended to target any country but to protect First Amendment freedoms and avoid government overreach into political expression. Representative Rader, the cosponsor, added that federal court decisions have found similar anti‑BDS penalties unconstitutional in several states and noted that the ACLU testified as an interested party warning of First Amendment implications.

During question-and-answer, committee members asked whether the statute affects private individuals (sponsors clarified it applies to entities contracting with the state), whether the statute narrows the vendor pool, and whether sponsors have evidence of companies being denied contracts for political reasons. Sponsors said they do not have precise data on rejected companies but offered to investigate and follow up with information.

What happens next: sponsors said they would look into procurement data showing whether companies were excluded under §9.76 and provide additional context to the committee.