Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Sponsors tell committee HB 112 would protect adults who refuse medical interventions for conscience reasons
Loading...
Summary
Sponsors of House Bill 112 said the Conscientious Right to Refuse Act would protect adults from being denied employment, services or access to commerce for refusing vaccines, biologics, masks (non‑surgical), gene‑editing products or tracking devices on conscience or religious grounds; they signaled willingness to refine language after members raised public‑health and employer‑liability questions.
Representative Gross and joint sponsor Representative Veil presented House Bill 112, the Conscientious Right to Refuse Act, describing it as a measure to protect religious and conscience‑based refusals of biologics, vaccines, gene‑editing technologies, masks (outside medical/dental procedures), and some medical devices used for tracking or storing personal information.
Sponsors framed the bill as protecting individual liberty and religious freedom under the Ohio Constitution and said it would bar denial of employment, public or medical services and access to commerce on the basis of those refusals. The bill would provide injunctive relief and a private right of action for individuals who prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a business, employer or public entity unlawfully discriminated under the act.
Committee members asked for clarifications: whether children are covered (the sponsors said the bill applies to individuals 18 and over but signaled willingness to adjust language), how employers could protect immunocompromised patients while respecting conscience claims, and whether the bill would force employment placements or override existing medical‑safety decisions. Sponsors repeatedly said they were open to amendments addressing workplace and public‑health exceptions and to drafting clarifying language about alternatives and liability protections for employers.
