⚖️ Rebranded Bill: HB 249 – “Indecent Exposure Modernization Act”: Drag Bill Ban: Written BY: LGBTQ+ Correspondent: Kyle Williams

🔍 Bill Overview & Rebranding

• Original Bill (HB 245):

  • Introduced in mid-2024 by Reps. Angela King (R-Celina) and Josh Williams (R-Sylvania Twp.).

  • Sought to expand the definition of “adult cabaret performances” to include anyone “exhibiting a gender identity different from their sex assigned at birth” (e.g., drag performers or transgender individuals) performing outside designated adult-only venues.

  • Imposed penalties ranging from a first-degree misdemeanor (if a juvenile was present) up to a fourth-degree felony (if the performance was deemed “obscene” and a juvenile under 13 was present).
    
    

• Rebranded Bill (HB 249 “Indecent Exposure Modernization Act”):

  • Introduced April 30, 2025, by the same sponsors (King & Williams), co-sponsored by 42 other Republican representatives.

  • Maintains the core language of HB 245 but uses the new label “Indecent Exposure Modernization Act.”

  • Continues to define “adult cabaret performance” as any show “harmful to juveniles or obscene,” expressly including “performers or entertainers who exhibit a gender identity that is different from the performer’s biological sex, using clothing, makeup, prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts…”
    
    

🗓️ Current Status (June 2025)

• Committee Assignment: HB 249 is currently in the Ohio House Criminal Justice Committee.

• No Floor Vote Yet: As of early June 2025, it has not advanced out of committee for a full House vote.

• Key Legislative Activity:

  • April 30, 2025: Bill formally introduced and referred to committee.

  • May 2025 (ongoing): Committee hearings have involved both proponents and opponents, but no vote date has been scheduled.
    
    

🛑 Organized Opposition

1. LGBTQ+ Advocacy & Civil-Liberties Groups

• Equality Ohio, ACLU of Ohio & TransOhio:

  • Issued a joint press release on June 4, 2024 (for HB 245) condemning the legislation as “broad and harmful,” arguing it criminalizes transgender and drag expression outside of adult-only venues.

  • Key concerns:

    1. Felony Charges for Gender Expression: The bill equates living/performing as transgender or in drag with “obscenity” and “harmful to juveniles,” risking felony convictions.

    2. Chilling Effect on the Arts & Free Speech: Drag is protected under the First Amendment; this law would impose criminal penalties on a recognized form of artistic expression.

    3. Vague & Overbroad Language: Allows for arbitrary enforcement against any LGBTQ+ person performing or existing in public spaces.
       
       

• Action Network (Grassroots Letter Campaign):

  • Organized a statewide letter-writing drive (April 2025) urging legislators to oppose HB 249, highlighting that its “sloppy” definitions could ensnare any transgender or gender-nonconforming person simply for appearing in public.

📣 Community & Performer Pushback

• Direct Constituent Emails (July 2024):

  • Overwhelmingly negative responses to HB 245—majority calling it a “waste of legislative time” given more urgent issues (healthcare, education, infrastructure).

  • Example: Rocky River resident Diane Zucker:

    “Once again, (you) and your colleagues are more worried about made-up issues than state healthcare, women’s health, infant mortality, jobs, education….”
    
    

• Local Drag Artists & Theaters:

  • Expressed that the bill’s vague “adult cabaret” definition could trigger prosecution for community theater (e.g., a play with a drag role) or local art showcases—forcing self-censorship.

  • Toledo performer Sugar Vermonte stressed that “drag is not inherently sexual,” warning that HB 245/HB 249 would “stifle creative expression across all genres.”
    
    

• Stonewall Columbus & Regional Centers:

  • Stonewall Columbus Executive Director Densil Porteous (Nov 2023) pointed out that HB 245 “directly aims to attack identities we must keep visibly at the forefront of our Pride because these identities have always been the most under attack.”

  • Greater Dayton LGBT Center’s executive director Rick Flynn stated:

    “It will take away opportunities for people to express themselves… If they see children in the audience, they’re not going to behave in a way they might if it were just adults.”
    
    

⚖️ Legal & Constitutional Concerns

1. First Amendment (Freedom of Expression):

   • Drag performance is recognized as protected speech. By equating “gender identity expression” with “obscenity,” HB 249 directly targets a constitutionally protected art form.

   • Broad, subjective terms like “harmful to juveniles” and “prurient interests” open the door for arbitrary enforcement.
     
     

2. Equal Protection & LGBTQ+ Discrimination:

   • Because the bill explicitly singles out “performers who exhibit a gender identity different from their assigned sex,” it codifies discrimination against transgender and drag-performing individuals.

   • Civil-liberties groups argue this violates the Equal Protection Clause by effectively creating a class of citizens subject to criminal penalties for simply existing or performing.
     Vague Statutory Language:

   • Terms like “obscene,” “harmful to juveniles,” and “prurient interest” lack clear legal definitions within the bill text, inviting judicial challenges on grounds of vagueness and overbreadth.

   • Opponents warn that even a school play featuring a drag-queen character could be prosecuted if any minor attends.
     
     

🚨 What’s Next?

• Committee Hearings & Testimony:

  • Throughout May and early June 2025, HB 249 remains in the Ohio House Criminal Justice Committee.

  • Proponents continue to frame it as “protecting children” from “adult performances,” while opponents file detailed constitutional analyses and community testimonials.
    
    

• Grassroots Mobilization:

  • Equality Ohio, ACLU of Ohio, TransOhio, local LGBTQ+ centers, and allied faith organizations are organizing:

    • Lobby Days (visiting legislators in Columbus)

    • Letter-writing campaigns via platforms like Action Network

    • Public demonstrations outside committee hearings to underscore the bill’s real-world impact
      actionnetwork.orgohiocapitaljournal.com

• Potential Legal Challenges:

  • If HB 249 passes the House and Senate, expect immediate lawsuits from civil-rights organizations citing First Amendment and Equal Protection violations.

  • Parallel litigation may seek injunctive relief to block enforcement until courts can adjudicate its constitutionality.
    equalityohio.orgthebuckeyeflame.com

🔑 Key Takeaways

1. Major Opposition Coalition: Equality Ohio, ACLU of Ohio, TransOhio, local drag performers, theaters, and allied faith groups are united against HB 249.

2. Constitutional Red Flags: First Amendment, Equal Protection, and vagueness challenges are the backbone of the legal opposition.

3. Legislative Stalemate (June 2025): Although rebranded, the legislation remains in committee with no scheduled floor vote. Robust grassroots activism and impending litigation make its ultimate fate uncertain.