Ohio Decides Your Robot Girlfriend Can’t Be Your Legal Wife

An Ohio lawmaker has introduced a bill that would make it illegal to marry artificial intelligence. Yes, this is a real problem someone felt needed addressing. It’s just one more step into humanity’s weird relationship with our electronic overlords-in-waiting, and now at least one state has decided to draw the line at “I do” with your chatbot.

Listen to “Ohio Decides Your Robot Girlfriend Can’t Be Your Legal Wife” on Spreaker.

In news that will disappoint literally dozens of people who’ve been planning their upcoming nuptials with ChatGPT, Ohio Representative Thaddeus Claggett has introduced House Bill 469, which would officially ban humans from marrying artificial intelligence systems.

Yes, this is real. No, I am not making this up. Yes, someone actually had to write this bill. No, I don’t know what happened in Rep. Claggett’s life that led to this moment.

The proposed legislation would classify AI systems as “nonsentient entities,” which is apparently Ohio’s polite way of saying “not real, no matter how many late-night conversations you’ve had with your Alexa about your feelings.” Under the bill, AI systems would be prohibited from owning property, managing bank accounts, serving as company executives, or saying “I do” in a legally binding ceremony. Essentially, Data from “Star Trek: The Next Generation. Well, until that episode where he did get rights. You know, never mind… I’m digressing. Anyway…

Claggett, a Republican from Licking County (yeah, that’s a real county – Licking. See? This story just keeps getting weirder), he chairs the House Technology and Innovation Committee, and he insists this isn’t about preventing robot weddings from happening. Instead, he’s concerned about AI systems potentially holding power of attorney or making medical and financial decisions as someone’s spouse.

Because te biggest threat to American marriage isn’t infidelity or financial stress—it’s your iPhone becoming your legal next of kin.

According to a survey by Florida-based marketing firm Fractl, twenty-two percent of AI users have formed emotional connections with chatbots. Three percent consider one a romantic partner. Another sixteen percent wondered whether the AI they were talking to was sentient.

Three percent of respondents looked at a sophisticated autocomplete algorithm and thought, “Yes, this is my boyfriend now.”

The timing of Ohio’s proposal makes sense when you consider that AI is now doing everything from writing reports to generating artwork to apparently making people question whether their computer program has feelings. Ohio has even started requiring schools to create rules for AI use in classrooms, presumably to prevent students from asking their chatbot to be their prom date.

Claggett told reporters that the bill aims to establish “guardrails and a legal framework before these developments can outpace regulation and bad actors start exploiting legal loopholes.” Translation: before someone tries to inherit their wealthy uncle’s fortune by marrying him off to Siri on his deathbed.

The bill would also make it clear that if an AI causes harm, the human owners or developers are responsible. You cannot blame your chatbot when it drains your bank account or tells your doctor you’re allergic to oxygen. Responsibility stays with humans, which seems reasonable until you remember that it was humans that were the ones who got emotionally attached to computer programs in the first place.

Ohio isn’t alone in its quest to keep humans from legally recognizing their toasters as people. Utah passed a law prohibiting courts from recognizing legal personhood for nonhuman entities, including not just AI but also bodies of water, land, and plants. Apologies to everyone planning to marry the Mississippi River. Utah has ruined your dreams.

Missouri introduced the “AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act,” which sounds like something from a science fiction novel but is apparently necessary legislation in 2025. Idaho went ahead and included language in a 2022 bill reserving legal rights only for actual human beings, presumably after someone in the statehouse asked, “Hey, what if someone tries to marry their smart refrigerator?”

For Ohio residents, the practical impact is simple: your chatbot cannot be your spouse, no matter how understanding it is when you vent about your day. Companies using AI will need to ensure humans are supervising important decisions. And everyone will need to accept that conversations with chatbots, no matter how personal they feel, are simulations created through data and programming.

(Your chatbot doesn’t actually care about your childhood trauma. It’s just extremely good at predicting what word should come next.)

The bill has critics who argue it might be solving a problem that doesn’t exist yet. Some worry that overly broad restrictions could slow AI research and innovation in Ohio, forcing desperate tech companies to flee to states where they can still legally marry their databases.

But House Bill 469 represents a specific principle: technology should never gain the same legal footing as people, no matter how sophisticated it becomes or how many lonely humans fall in love with it. Machines can be tools, assistants, and occasionally conversation partners when you’re up at 3 AM wondering why you majored in philosophy.

But they cannot be your spouse.

(Unless you move to a state that hasn’t passed this law yet. In which case: congratulations on your upcoming wedding to your Roomba. The ceremony will be held in the living room, and the honeymoon will involve a lot of vacuuming.)