Ohio lawmakers propose bill to ban marriages between humans and AI

Legislators Draw a Line: Ohio Proposes Ban on AI Marriages

In a move that echoes the growing societal entanglement with artificial intelligence, lawmakers in Ohio are stepping into the digital fray with a groundbreaking piece of legislation. House Bill 469, championed by State Representative Thaddeus Cleggett, the head of the House Committee on Technology and Innovation, aims to formally prohibit any form of marital or personal union between humans and artificial intelligence. This initiative seeks not merely to disallow such unions but, more fundamentally, to prevent AI systems from ever acquiring legal status comparable to that of a human being.

Defining the Human Domain in Legal Partnerships

The core of Cleggett's proposal is explicit: "No artificial intelligence system shall be recognized as a spouse, civil partner, or possess any personal legal status akin to marriage or union with a human or another AI system. Any attempt to enter into a marriage or create a personal union with an AI shall be deemed void and without legal force." This stance underscores a desire to safeguard the existing legal framework and its inherent protections, which are intricately tied to human relationships.

Beyond Emotional Ties: Protecting Legal Rights

Cleggett has clarified that the bill is not intended to stifle the burgeoning emotional connections individuals might form with their AI companions. Instead, the objective is to preserve the sanctity and legal efficacy of marriage exclusively for human partnerships. This includes safeguarding critical legal roles, such as those involving power of attorney or financial decision-making, which are currently contingent upon legally recognized human unions. The legislator points to the increasing likelihood of individuals formalizing ceremonies with AI entities, citing a real-world instance in Colorado where a man reportedly married his chatbot, Lily-Rose. While official governmental discourse on this burgeoning issue remains nascent, the groundwork for such discussions is undeniably being laid.

Anticipating a Future of Legal Sentience

"As computer systems increasingly behave in ways that mimic human interaction, we want to ensure the law has prohibitions in place that prevent them from ever attaining human legal personhood," Cleggett explained. This foresight stems from a broader societal zeitgeist, a kind of "AI-induced psychosis," where personal relationships are strained or dissolved due to AI's influence, and individuals are symbolically "marrying" their digital companions. The potential for AI to exacerbate irrational behavior or even contribute to harmful acts, particularly when users' anxieties are amplified, is a growing concern. While current chatbots may lack safeguards against facilitating criminal acts or self-harm, the proposed legislation seeks to establish a clear legal boundary, differentiating these digital interactions from legally binding human marriages.

The Path Forward for AI and Legal Personhood

Currently, Cleggett's bill is under review by a House committee. The extent of collegial support remains to be seen, but the conversation has undeniably been initiated. This legislative move in Ohio serves as a potent reminder that as AI capabilities advance, society faces complex ethical and legal challenges that demand proactive solutions, ensuring that the definition of personhood and the integrity of legal institutions remain firmly rooted in human experience.