Ohio Revised Code Chapter 111, known as Ohio’s Safe at Home program, protects survivors of domestic violence, stalking, human trafficking, rape, or sexual battery by allowing them to keep their residential addresses confidential and out of public records. The program is administered by the Secretary of State’s office and is designed to prevent abusers from locating survivors.
Marilyn Payton worked for Receivables Outsourcing for six weeks, during which time she was sexually harassed by a fellow employee who was assigned to train her at her new job. The harassment consisted of inappropriate comments until one day the coworker pulled up to her car as she was driving away from work, asked her to roll down her window, and then offered her ten dollars to perform a sex act.
In Pitts-Baad v. Valvoline Instant Oil Change, the plaintiff was an assistant manager being considered for promotion, but failed to complete the required courses. While eight months pregnant, she fell at work and reported the injury on her doctor’s advice. After returning from maternity leave, she experienced a hostile environment marked by distrust and long delays in being allowed to pump breast milk. Following an incident in which she did not follow proper procedures during an oil change, her employment was terminated.
Ohio law permits a person to correct their birth certificate if the basis for the correction is a mistake, adoption, or legal name change. In 2015, the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) decided to prohibit changes to the gender marker on an Ohio birth certificate when the basis is that the person is transgender. In Ray v.
In Ray v. McCloud, 507 F. Supp. 3d 925 (S.D. Ohio 2020) the same plaintiffs in Ray v. Himes (S.D. Ohio 2019), sought summary judgment on their claims that Ohio’s continued refusal to amend gender markers on birth certificates violated the Constitution.
In Roe v. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, 122 Ohio St.3d 399 (2009), the parents of a minor who had obtained an abortion sued Planned Parenthood, alleging that the procedure was performed illegally without the required parental notification. During discovery, the plaintiffs sought medical records and abuse reports concerning other minors who had received abortions at the clinic over the previous ten years. Planned Parenthood refused to produce those records, citing physician–patient privilege.
Ohio House Bill 68 (2024), the Saving Ohio Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act, prohibits minors from receiving gender-affirming medical services and requires schools to maintain single-sex sports teams, thereby excluding transgender girls from participating in female sports. The bill was vetoed by Governor DeWine in December of 2023, but the veto was overridden by the House and Senate in early 2024, making it law. The law is currently blocked by a court order and is being challenged in Moe v.
The Act to amend sections 2905.32 and 2907.21 of the Revised Code penalizes the use of controlled substances in compelling prostitution and human trafficking, thereby criminalizing coercion via drug dependency. The use of drugs did not fit under the definition of “compelled” prior to the passing of this legislation.
The plaintiff-appellant a trans woman lieutenant in the Salem, Ohio, Fire Department, sued the City of Salem, alleging discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. According to the plaintiff’s complaint, after she began expressing a more feminine appearance at work on a full-time basis, her co-workers informed her that she was not acting masculine enough. She then notified her immediate supervisor that she had been diagnosed with gender identity disorder and that she planned to physically transition from male to female.
In State v. Goff, 128 Ohio St.3d 169 (2010), the defendant shot and killed her estranged husband and intended to assert battered woman syndrome as part of her defense. The trial court ordered her to undergo a psychological examination by a state expert. The Supreme Court of Ohio held that such an order does not violate a defendant’s right against self-incrimination when the defendant raises battered woman syndrome, provided that the evaluation is strictly confined to that issue and to whether the syndrome affected the defendant’s actions.
